nope

it was ps3 vs xbox 360

and switch vs ps5

and technically console vs pc

steam vs playstation and xbox

Maybe in the sense that Sega proved you could challenge Nintendo, but otherwise Sega not only lost, but they failed to maintain a foothold in the market. A real shame. In terms of the wars that were of lasting consequence, S.N.E.S. vs. Playstation and the 6th generation wars were more important.

Yeah, I know the S.N.E.S. is a weird console to pit against the Playstation, but that's how it worked out for the first couple of years of the Playstation's existence, and the N64 was late to the party.

Well, the other thing about the Sega vs. Nintendo console war is that it forced the industry to innovate past the N.E.S., but if the Genesis didn't achieve that, the Turbographx 16 would've anyway.

Originally posted by Apexnexius:

Was Sega MegaDrive vs Super Nintendo the most important system war ever?

In some ways? It was.

I don't have time for an essay. So, I'll keep this brief.

The entire idea of "console wars" kinda got started there. Intellivision vs Atari should be mentioned, but that was light in comparison.

Sega and Nintendo trashed each other. Especially in Western markets.

Even Phillips CDI and TurboGraphix16 got in on it.

Meanwhile, Microsoft was (let's say) influencing companies to making their software only compatible with their OS.

No, not really, the Super Nintendo was SO MUCH better than the Genesis. I Had a Genesis but I did get an SNES when it came about because the SNES version of the games were SUPERIOR!

Buying an SNES JUST for A LINK TO THE PAST was worth buying the system for that SINGLE game.

None of the above. It was the Amiga v Atari ST

It wasn't really a 'console war' in the modern sense of it. The console market was quite a different one back then. So was the gaming industry.

Did it influence PlayStation?

Originally posted by Abaddon the Despoiler:

Did it influence PlayStation?

Sort of.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_NES_CD-ROM

The collaboration deal fell through and Sony went off and did it on their own.

Originally posted by Doctor Go-Go:

No, not really, the Super Nintendo was SO MUCH better than the Genesis. I Had a Genesis but I did get an SNES when it came about because the SNES version of the games were SUPERIOR!

Buying an SNES JUST for A LINK TO THE PAST was worth buying the system for that SINGLE game.

Both systems had positives that the other did not have. For instance, the Genesis had a Yamaha FM synthesizer, and could produce the amazing, banging soundtrack to Streets of Rage series, something the SNES could not possibly have done. The Genesis was also faster and more responsive (less input lag), so some games that came out on both systems were actually better on the Genesis, such as the NHL 9x series of hockey games. SNES played NHL games like skating through mud.

On the other hand the SNES had more memory and could do more complex games like Civ, Sim City, and countless JRPGs. SNES had more colors and a better screen resolution, and most importantly, SNES had a DSP and sample-based sound chip. Nobuo Uematsu could never have made his amazing Squaresoft soundtracks on the Genesis, not in a million years.

These are just a few of the differences off the top of my head, and I'm sure there are more.

Both systems were incredible for different reasons.

Originally posted by ☮ne✟rue𝓢ax☯n:

None of the above. It was the Amiga v Atari ST

Amiga wins for video.

Atari ST wins for built-in MIDI.

Looking at the specs for even the Amiga 3000 today, which was God-Tier when it was new, makes me laugh. They are pathetic compared with today's cheapo potato PC specs. Heck even by today's smartphone specs. But man, when it was new, it sure was cutting-edge.

Originally posted by Masque:

Originally posted by Doctor Go-Go:

No, not really, the Super Nintendo was SO MUCH better than the Genesis. I Had a Genesis but I did get an SNES when it came about because the SNES version of the games were SUPERIOR!

Buying an SNES JUST for A LINK TO THE PAST was worth buying the system for that SINGLE game.

Both systems had positives that the other did not have. For instance, the Genesis had a Yamaha FM synthesizer, and could produce the amazing, banging soundtrack to Streets of Rage series, something the SNES could not possibly have done. The Genesis was also faster and more responsive (less input lag), so some games that came out on both systems were actually better on the Genesis, such as the NHL 9x series of hockey games. SNES played NHL games like skating through mud.

On the other hand the SNES had more memory and could do more complex games like Civ, Sim City, and countless JRPGs. SNES had more colors and a better screen resolution, and most importantly, SNES had a DSP and sample-based sound chip. Nobuo Uematsu could never have made his amazing Squaresoft soundtracks on the Genesis, not in a million years.

These are just a few of the differences off the top of my head, and I'm sure there are more.

Both systems were incredible for different reasons.

UH NO! Much of what they claimed the Genesis could do and how it would out perform was ALL CLAIMS backed by whatever consumers were willing to believe in because NO one cared to prove either wrong. It was TRIVIAL!

Genesis was JUST SLOWER! AND everything was lower context and resolution to compensate. The Genesis came first, it was OLD by the time the SNES surfaced. The Genesis was FAR MORE gimmick and hype. IF the SNES had a version of the game it was BETTER!

Originally posted by Apexnexius:

Title.

It was pretty big war I sat by most of it on C 64 and nes from my friends and played snes, megadrive at the shops 'testing' the games as well as round my friends houses.

I preferred Megadrive which I bought eventually secondhand and a game every week or so.

People either had Nintendo or Sega.
I know there were others out there but that was the main thing from that time and people I knew.
There wasn't big arguments like you got with the internet on like XBOX360 Oblivion has better GRASS RESOLUTION!!!
And the subsequent insults after.

People were happy with their system and if someone else had different it meant we went round theirs to play their games and then the next friends house and so on.
So people were happy with the DIVERSITY.

In the longer run the actual war between companies....
YEah that was big.
Sega went to making games and Nintendo went on to make more advanced console systems with really irritating games that people love.

Sony just beat everybody with a big stick of BSA style Triumph.
Playstation, as a gamer the very idea of such a thing as Playstation brought almost choir singing moments.

Originally posted by Masque:

Both systems had positives that the other did not have. For instance, the Genesis had a Yamaha FM synthesizer, and could produce the amazing, banging soundtrack to Streets of Rage series, something the SNES could not possibly have done.

Not entirely true.

Sega struggled to produce the Genesis. Using multiple companies for the internal hardware of the console.

(This was before the CDX, Nomad, or the slim version.)

You can guess the internals based on the numbers on the underside of the case. However, this is not entirely accurate. My unit BLASTS YOU IN THE FACE WITH OVERWHELMING BASS. Despite it's numbers indicating it's supposed to have one of the inferior sound chips.

The only way to know for sure is to take off the case, and read the name printed on the chips. Which I highly recommend you do not do.

3DO vs SEGA Saturn was the most important one. Nothing else comes close.

Originally posted by Doctor Go-Go:

Originally posted by Masque:

Both systems had positives that the other did not have. For instance, the Genesis had a Yamaha FM synthesizer, and could produce the amazing, banging soundtrack to Streets of Rage series, something the SNES could not possibly have done. The Genesis was also faster and more responsive (less input lag), so some games that came out on both systems were actually better on the Genesis, such as the NHL 9x series of hockey games. SNES played NHL games like skating through mud.

On the other hand the SNES had more memory and could do more complex games like Civ, Sim City, and countless JRPGs. SNES had more colors and a better screen resolution, and most importantly, SNES had a DSP and sample-based sound chip. Nobuo Uematsu could never have made his amazing Squaresoft soundtracks on the Genesis, not in a million years.

These are just a few of the differences off the top of my head, and I'm sure there are more.

Both systems were incredible for different reasons.

UH NO! Much of what they claimed the Genesis could do and how it would out perform was ALL CLAIMS backed by whatever consumers were willing to believe in because NO one cared to prove either wrong. It was TRIVIAL!

Genesis was JUST SLOWER! AND everything was lower context and resolution to compensate. The Genesis came first, it was OLD by the time the SNES surfaced. The Genesis was FAR MORE gimmick and hype. IF the SNES had a version of the game it was BETTER!

Anyone who played a lot of NHL series -- which was quite a few of my friends in and just after high school -- on both systems knew the truth, and preferred the Genesis for those games.