Console Wars: Losing With Power-Why the Most Powerful Consoles Always Lose N64 Xbox Sega PlayStation

Console Wars: Why the Most Powerful Consoles Always Lose! N64 Xbox Dreamcast PlayStation Atari
There have been 40 years of console wars, but have you noticed that the most powerful console always seem to lose it's generation? Why is this? We deep dive into it in this documentary. From Blast Processing to terra flops, power doesn't guarantee a win...but does it ever?
Read the article version of this at: xstreamed.tv/w...
Atari 2600, Intellivision, Colecovision, NES, Nintendo, Sega, Master System, Turbo Grafx, PC Engine, Amiga CD32, Atari Jaguar, Retro Gaming, SNES, Super Nintendo, Sega Genesis, Sega Mega Drive, Sega CD, Mega CD, Sega 32X, Sega Saturn, Playstation, PSOne, PS2, PS3, PS4, PS5, Xbox, Xbox One, Xbox 360, N64, Sony, Gamecube, Wii, Wii U, Nintendo Switch, Xbox Series X, PS4 Pro, Blast Processing, 8-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit, 64-bit, 128-bit, Terra flops, Fairchild channel F, console wars

[@GeekBattleGaming]

Part 2 is up now!! kzbin.info/www/bejne/nGG7gYeahtGchZY it focusses on the handheld consoles! 🎮🎮🎮

[@kiaba360-4]

Power is potentially the least important variable in determining whether a console will sell well. Brand loyalty/reputation, game library, availability, cost, and marketing strategy are far more important.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

And yet power is always the thing the game companies focus on whether it’s number of colours, bits, or teraflops.

[@kiaba360-4]

@@GeekBattleGaming Ironic, isn't it? Those old-school commercials are hilarious, but they were definitely impactful. The way we categorize console generations (8-bit, 16-bit, etc) was influenced by the marketing. If power actually mattered, the Wii wouldn't have stood a chance against the PS3 and 360. The Neo-Geo would also be remembered as one of the most popular consoles.

[@TheMahayanist]

​@@kiaba360-4Intellivision, Master System, Sega Genesis, Nintendo 64, Xbox, PS3, PS4, Xbox Series S/X Pretty sure that's the strongest in each generation. None of these won except PS4, because Wii U and Xbox One flopped so hard. Nintendo's second coming eliminated PlayStation 4 later though.

[@kiaba360-4]

@@TheMahayanist Overall, the Genesis wasn't more capable than the SNES. Technically, SNES is the best-selling 16-bit console. However, the Genesis still sold well because of cost, availability, library, and marketing strategy. It probably could've sold more if it continued production like the SNES, but Sega allocated their resources towards creating new consoles. The Super Famicom was technically discontinued in 2003. The Wii U failed so bad that Nintendo decided to cannibalize their largely successful handheld division in order to create the Switch hybrid console. The Switch is more of a complementary device to whatever Sony/Microsoft are offering. Nintendo hasn't directly competed since the Gamecube. To make it clear, "competing" and "succeeding" are not the same. The Wii didn't directly compete with the 360/PS3, but it was immensely successful.

[@Adamtendo_player_1]

@@kiaba360-4 the switch definitely isn’t a complementary system to the PS5 or Xbox series X there are many people that just have a switch like myself and it’s my choice because I don’t want to be spending money on two consoles only to not enjoy myself with these AAA games which I had a taste of on PS4 before I traded it in and got my switch.

[@lmiller9178]

Probably because they're more widely available and affordable, the 8-bit Master System is still produced and sold in Brazil today by Tectoy despite being nearly 40 years old.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

Definitely part of it, but sometimes the cheaper consoles don’t do well. Nintendo at times paused production of the GameCube and Wii U because they weren’t selling enough. In both cases they were cheaper than the competition

[@dr.charlesedwardflorendobr3952]

Well yes. However, Famiclones are made by many companies in China and are widely distributed. These are clearly not licensed by Nintendo, but their availability is all over the place.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@dr.charlesedwardflorendobr3952 absolutely. I believe Tectoy did license the Master System from Sega in Brazil though

[@SomeOrangeCat]

Sega is some weird cult there. There's a Brazilian KZbinr who produces bogus comparison videos and will ban you for pointing out how she stacks them all in Sega's favor.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@SomeOrangeCat wow that’s crazy. I love most consoles, but can also have fun talking about the ups and downs of any of them.

[@TubboDaKittyCat]

Wait what the hell? Why does this have less than a 1000 views?!?! Good production quality man~ 😊

[@GeekBattleGaming]

Thank you! I worked hard on it! Starting to do more documentary style videos on the channel. Appreciate the positive feedback. Hopefully it’ll find an audience

[@jackal27]

You didn’t even cover handhelds, which I think prove this point even more!

[@GeekBattleGaming]

I’m working on that video right now 😄 when I saw this one was over 40 minutes I decided to separate the two out

[@TheMahayanist]

​@@GeekBattleGamingNintendo dominated handhelds even though Gamegear and PSP were stronger. But your argument is stronger for handhelds because stronger console means less battery, which makes it not only more expensive but less convenient.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@TheMahayanist yes absolutely working on that video as the follow up to this on right now. It’s another fascinating history of how power rarely wins but they always still tried to push power as the winning factor

[@GreyWolfLeaderTW]

Short Answer: Because graphics are not the most important feature in a console's specifications. Typically it boils down to: How well does this platform support *software* . CD storage tech drove the PS1's success, low production costs for the storage format of games led to low costs for licenses, low costs to produce games (you can produce CDs for pennies per disc as opposed to dollars per cartridge) and thus low royalty rates needed for 3rd Party Software, thus drawing large quantities of developers and their games to the platform. DVD support drove the PS2's success, repeating the strengths of the CD format for the PS1, plus adding support for the then new rapidly-rising physical media format (which is still the dominate video format today, long after blu-ray and 4k discs have shown up). The Wii succeeded on the novelty of motion controls, which attracted a casual crowd outside of the classic hardcore gamer demographic (should be noted the actual hardware capabilities of the Wii are actually around twice that of the GameCube; weaker than the PS3 and Xbox 360 by a notable margin, but people often undersell what its hardware was capable of). The Nintendo Switch's success is riding on the utility of being capable of both a standard console and one that can switch into a handheld console.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

Part 2 will be online tomorrow! 😮 all about handhelds!

[@pokepress]

Definitely an area where the most powerful device doesn’t win.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@pokepress absolutely!

[@GlennStubberfield]

Very informative. Looking forward to the next one... :)

[@MultiDudeman]

Spoiler, it's the same pattern for hand helds as well.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

Haha it is. 😂 Working on that video now as a part 2

[@Matt08719801]

the genesis -megadrive had a nearly 10mhz processor vs the super nintendos 3.5 mhz where do you come up with your info that the super nintendo is more powerful? ive played several cross platform games most of the time the framerate on the megadrive-genesis is way faster than the super nintendo

[@GeekBattleGaming]

The SNES had more RAM, was capable of more colours on screen at once, could produce larger sprites, handle more sprites on screen at once, was capable of a higher resolution and hd more RAM and channels dedicated for audio. Mega Drive had a higher CPU speed certainly, and in many areas they were very close. But this is why I recognise SNES as edging it out

[@pokepress]

Also, megahertz can be hard to compare between processor architectures. The 68000 in the Genesis often needed more clock cycles to perform the same operation as the 65C816 in the SNES. Of course, many SNES games didn’t run at the full clock speed due to ROM speed… I think calling the SNES the more powerful console is fair, but I’ll agree that it might be one of the least straightforward comparisons. The Genesis could do some things better, for sure.

[@captain3186]

@@pokepress "megahertz can be hard to compare between processor architectures" Somebody gets it. Comparing Clock Speeds of different architectures is like Apple to Oranges.

[@Adamtendo_player_1]

@@GeekBattleGamingthe Mega Drive did things the SNES couldn’t do thanks to its Motorola 68000 which made it possible for games like Panorama Cotton and Gunstar Heroes which the Mega Drive was also to do without any helper chips, yes the SNES had advantages of better graphics and sound but that is a given with its newer technology.

[@kevinkingslayer2450]

Really,really good video my guy! Very informative and precise....✌. Liked and subscribed.👍

[@GeekBattleGaming]

Thank you! I appreciate the support! There’ll be more videos like this coming up shortly 😃

[@zezizezseze7544]

Personaly what makes a console great is their games..being powerfull is good and helps in many cases but in the end is all about the games you prefer.My fav consoles are N64,Dreamcast,Xbox(original one),Gamecube,wii and,ds and ps3.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

Games are the most important thing. I always thought the N64 had better games than the PS1 but more people bought PlayStation

[@RobertoMagnoV]

Now that's interesting. I'm from Brazil, and here we did have access to NES games, even those from Japan, that wouldn't run on the original NES american system. But Mega Drive was the one and only king. I guess accessibility and marketing are the main factor.

[@marcoschukerberga1418]

I can speak for myself in this battle of consoles but for me as a kid growing up playing video games was a monetary issue mostly, my first console was the sega genesis because was cheaper than the super nintendo in every way, the same happened with the saturn/ps1/N64 era even If would love to play ocarina of time back in the day, the N64 was out of question, for each game that a friend of mine bought for nintendo I could buy like 6 for playstation 1, the same happened in the ps2 era, nintendo gamecube was way too expensive for me, I skipped the two next generations because adulting went not as I expected lol, and today as a fully grown up man with my own salary decided to buy a ps5 and saving for a switch very soon before the year ends.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

Cost is definitely a factor and definitely when it comes to games. I remember when Conker’s bad fur day was £60 rrp and the shop Game gave you a free controller and a copy of Quake 2 with it as the price was nuts. Also Nintendo’s player’s choice games were the same price as new PS1 games

[@pokepress]

Can you clarify on GameCube being more expensive? I don’t recall the games being very different in price, and I believe the GameCube was the cheaper system depending on the time anyway. Could you just not afford both systems? Did you mostly buy games used? Obviously now the used market for GameCube games has some incredibly expensive titles, but that’s a different story.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@pokepress I don’t remember GameCube being more expensive either. Nintendo games often don’t go down in price like other systems though, so maybe that’s what is meant

[@marcoschukerberga1418]

@@pokepress I Live in Argentina since Nintendo does not have an official distributor here (because piracy) all the Nintendo systems were always expensive and really hard to get the games also, was an import hell to buy the Gamecube or the N64 and import only means the cost of things triples

[@crazedlunatic43]

The GameCube was more expensive? Are you talking about buying the games nowadays because if so, I could agree with you on that. If not, I’m not sure what store in what location sold GameCube’s at a higher price than other Sixth gen systems, when the system itself was the complete opposite of expensive back in the day. It’s what helped save the GameCube from being written off as a commercial failure since the price of the system had dropped down to $99 by 2003, along with the traditional higher quality and family friendly software meant it was an appealing gift for kids and Nintendo fans alike. Something that cannot be said about Wii U, which remained at $299 for much of it’s lifespan till it was taken off life support in early 2017.

[@fireaza]

"Why don't the most powerful consoles win?? They're the most powerful! They should obviously have won!" is a question/statement people have asked/made since the dawn of consoles. And the answer has always been the same: Because the weaker consoles are cheaper and people generally choose the cheapest option.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

Cheaper doesn’t always explain it. Dreamcast and GameCube were cheaper than PS2. Wii U was cheaper than PS4 and Xbox One. It’s a factor but on lots of occasions it doesn’t explain it

[@TheMahayanist]

@@GeekBattleGaming Cheap and available. Only Nintendo or Sega fanatics wanted GameCube or Dreamcast, whereas everyone wanted a PS2, it had the most games and a DVD player. For the second example, it came down to casuals vs hardcore gamers. Nintendo and Microsoft marketed only to casuals, only PS4 seemed to be something hardcore gamers would want.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@TheMahayanist yeah but the reason PS2 had the most games wasn’t by the choice of Sega or Nintendo not wanting them. PS2 had the most games because of its success and because Sony aggressively sought deals for exclusives. Things just snowballed from there. The DVD player was a huge part of the PS2 success. Microsoft usually always target the hardcore crowd and only haven’t when they punched Kinect and tried to have the XBox one focus on multimedia aspects. Wii U attempted to win back hardcore gamers with their focus on “U” because they’d already run the casual market into the ground. Sony read the room with the PS4 and didn’t make the mistakes Microsoft made with the Kinect and DRM. They also had done a lot of course correction from their PS3 mistakes

[@TheMahayanist]

@@GeekBattleGaming I agree with everything here except that "Sony course corrected from PS3" I think Sony has declined continuously since PS3, and PS5 is the worst yet. The only reason Sony won on PS4 is because their competitors dropped the ball so badly. If that hadn't happened, PS4 would not have been so well received. And in hindsight, the Xbox One holds up in 2023 better than the PS4. Basically PS5 and PS4 are indistinguishable in terms of software and services, only price and hardware. And while that's pretty much the same with Xbox One/Series, the services and software on offer because of Gamepass vastly outshine what Sony offers.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@TheMahayanist yeah that’s fair with the Xbox One situation. And definitely I’d agree that Sony was fortunate with their rivals dropping the ball. What I meant with Sony course correcting was that starting on pS3 they took steps to lower the price and managed to make the system a success and then worked to win back fans with making things more gamer friendly on PS4

[@gars129]

It's worth noting that much like the PC Engine and Genesis competed with the SNES, the PS1 and Saturn competed with the SNES for two and a half years. And considering true 3D gaming truly became competitive around 1996, the SNES still was the console for any RPG until FF7 proved the viability for those games having massive budgets and succeding in the west. Not to mention that pre rendered 3D often looked better if you didn't build around a 3D camera yet, and the SNES' could still look modern with 2D games (Star Ocean, DKC)

[@GeekBattleGaming]

Hmmm, you raise an interesting point about the SNES here. It was still the Nintendo competition to the Saturn and PS1 until it released in 96. The delay of the N64 certainly didn’t help it’s chances.

[@Cloud-dt6xb]

I'd argue that price and no backwards compatibility were also huge factors as to why a console failed or at least did'nt do as well as the previous one. Not only was the Wii cheaper than the other two, but you could play all of Nintendo's game libary with it at the time. It was backwards compatible with the gamecube and it had the virtual console on it for their previous generations someting both Ps3 and Xbox cut away from their systems. The Wii fumbled sure but the Switch's price is one of the many reasons it's doing so well especially with the Ps5 and Xbox being so damn expensive in comparison. It can't be backwards compatible with the Wii U but I'm sure that's why there's been alot of remasters and remakes for the Switch so people has some way to still play their old games, not to mention old Playstation and Xbox titles have found their way onto it too.

[@ds3602]

“The lowest powered console will dictate the content for the generation”… Thanks a lot series s

[@GeekBattleGaming]

😂 to be honest I think we’re still mostly getting games that are also on PS4 or Xbox One that hold back the PS5 and Series X from their potential.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

😂 to be honest I think we’re still mostly getting games that are also on PS4 or Xbox One that hold back the PS5 and Series X from their potential.

[@TheMahayanist]

Series S has better performance than PS5 and Series X. Do a side by side.

[@kiaba360-4]

@@TheMahayanist List some examples.

[@TheMahayanist]

Like I said, do a side by side. Seriously, Series S runs better frames than Series X. Do a side by side.

[@murkywaters5502]

Cool video, dude! Keep it up!

[@GeekBattleGaming]

Thanks! I really appreciate that! Working on my next documentary right now 😃

[@Vlahoti12]

Well explained and very professional!

[@GeekBattleGaming]

Thank you! I appreciate the kind words! Loved the response to the video and working on my next documentary style video now!

[@slamjamwrestlingshow]

The PS5 or the Xbox Series X. Which is more powerful?

[@TheMahayanist]

Xbox Series S is actually meaty against both of those. Watch a side by side.

[@SeanUCF]

Series X probably edges it by the slightest of margins, but it really just boils down to how much time and effort the developers put into getting the most out of the hardware.

[@SeanUCF]

​@@TheMahayanist What are you talking about? Digital Foundry does analyses of the consoles all the time and Series S, while still a great console, pretty consistently runs at a lower resolution or a less stable frame rate (usually the latter).

[@TheMahayanist]

​@@SeanUCFEvery side by side I've seen shows Series S having higher frames than both Series X and PS5.

[@SeanUCF]

@@TheMahayanist I don't know what you're watching, but there have been rare cases I've seen in some games where Series S has a more stable frame rate, but it's always at a lower resolution and lower fidelity so it's not a 1 to 1 comparison by any means. Series X and PS5 are going to out perform the Series S in basically every situation. They are just more power consoles.

[@loganford3921]

Mega Drive advantage over the SNES that it can handle more stuff on screen with out or little slow down.because of the CPU. Best example is Contra Hard corps as there more faster aggressive bosses and stuff happening with out slow down unlike Contra 3.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

That’s useful info to know. Will look out for other examples. Thanks!

[@juststatedtheobvious9633]

The SNES had an 8-bit databus...among many other issues. The weirdest was the limitation of two sprite tile sizes per screen. This meant wasting resources on stacking smaller sprites or hiding the size of larger sprites.

[@juststatedtheobvious9633]

@@destructodisk9074 The SNES had more sprites without flicker, mode 7, and genuine transparency. It's neither as weak as Genesis fans think, nor as powerful as SNES fans imagine.

[@juststatedtheobvious9633]

​@@destructodisk9074 There's Genesis games that fake it. Red Zone and Contra Hardcorps, for example, look convincing enough for games that wage genocide on any player distracted by all the tech demo magic. But level one's scene stealing mode 7 style giant robot cyclops is just big chunks of vertical scrolling background tiles. There's zero rotation. Once you see how it's done, you'll immediately notice when Gunstar and Puggsy are pulling the exact same trick, with the exact same limitations. Meanwhile, Red Zone's background rotation was simply changing the color of the background tiles, like they were giant low resolution pixels. As for the rare examples of real mode 7 like effects programmed in software? That F-Zero style homebrew speaks for itself. The Sega CD isn't losing any sleep over this. Neither is Super Nintendo. Speaking of which, the SNES can't be too bad, considering it has the superior Smash TV. There's more to be said, like how the two systems practically offered consumers a choice between performance mode vs. quality mode, but let's not forget SNES eventually won that console war. In terms of hurting a platform's reputatiion, slowdown was nothing compared to Capcom's Genesis Streetfighter 2 voice samples...

[@jensenovesian2861]

Pushing the edge means early game development is confusing.

[@SomeOrangeCat]

Because it's not about power, its about the game library.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

That’s a huge part, but some of the most loved consoles like Dreamcast or GameCube didn’t sell well even though they have great games

[@TheMahayanist]

​​​@@GeekBattleGaming my theory is that people who bought PlayStation were newer gamers who weren't in the Sega and Nintendo fanclub and saw PlayStation as an affordable gateway into gaming. That explains the explosive sales numbers for PS1/PS2 anyway.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@TheMahayanist potentially and I’m sure that was the case for some people. PlayStation also targeted older gamers so people who had a NES or SNES/Genesis may have progressed to PlayStation or PS2 as having more adult targeted games.

[@Adamtendo_player_1]

Nintendo would definitely not stubborn in what they did with this switch because in an old interview with the late Suturo Iwata for what was gonna happen to the industry with the continued focus on graphics and power and saw that they were diminishing returns in this strategy and it looks like Nintendo was proven right with the current poor state of AAA gaming and the switch again is proof that the most powerful console rarely always wins.

[@PhilippeSymons]

The switch should really be considered as the hybrid device it is. As the successor for the 3DS, it's quite impressive. As the successor to the Switch, it's not. Its handheld status is its main selling point. Without it, the console would've bombed just as the Wii U did. Nintendo was very smart merging their handheld and home console lines in this gen. But because of this, I feel like this console should not be considered part of the pattern. In the gen of PS4 and XBox One, Microsoft really lost peoples' trust and that's a big factor there. This loss of trust still affects them today.

[@nakdad]

price

[@GeekBattleGaming]

That’s one of the factors, but the Wii U was cheaper than PS4 and Xbox One and still flopped. Dreamcast was cheaper than PS2

[@pokepress]

On the flip side, some consoles definitely priced themselves outside the range of mass adoption. Neo Geo, 3DO. You could also make a case for the PS3.

[@theamazingmikelee9857]

What's up with all the super low res video?

[@GeekBattleGaming]

Just sourcing lots of old footage. Will try to get better quality footage where I can

[@theamazingmikelee9857]

@@GeekBattleGaming When it comes to the advertismements I can see how it can be hard to find good reproductions but surely you can capture the gameplay footage yourself? Emulation makes that easy enough.

[@theamazingmikelee9857]

@@GeekBattleGaming It was the Shenmue footage specifically that made me comment. It was especially bad and it was juxtaposed by your commentary about how much better the Dreamcast looked than the competition.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@theamazingmikelee9857 an I see the irony of that 😂 I’ll get more original footage rather than trailers for the next ones

[@TinyBearTim]

Because they are almost always cheaper and have more family friendly / party type games

[@JohnSmith-zw8vp]

The console with the most blue chip exclusives wins. Every tme.

[@suntannedduck2388]

Good video. Wii sure the lowest but controllers changes things. Burnout Revenge I think it is on 360 early on looks garbage but transitions are what they seem in developing to new platforms. 360 has more RAM then PS3 but CPU and GPU designs are interesting and while less RAM it is possible to make things look good if they know how and they did. So less in some parts doesn't matter if its smart artistic design and programming know how to achieve it with the right techniques and engine tweaks no matter the hardware. It's why seeing characters look better than environments or environment better than characters. Say Wreckfest the cars aren't great the environments are good on Switch as the PS4/Xbox One but RE6 has good character models and bad environments so pixelated and horrible because they stretched the game thin on the storylines idea it changed development and of course deadlines are what they are. RE5 and RE6 show different sides for sure. PS3/360 is tough as I don't see either as less powerful. Complexity of PS3/Power PC simplicity like Wii but more power and differences on 360 sure but hard to judge unless you know enough. First party on PS3 push the system while third parties use the 512 MB RAM on 360 so they look better there (besides Kinect and late sequel 360 games of course look good) over the 256Mb RAM of PS3 so textures and lighting for sure differ no doubt. Can thank Epic Games for the 512MB design change on the 360 by the way. Even the Gears 3 PS3 test was interesting sure not ever happening retail and of course it's a test on the platform but besides being unfinished and a bit buggy is playable and noticeable of differences of a 360 exclusive on the opposite and seeing how it compared. That or I guess MLB The Show games these days. NES made sense because of the contract they had preventing the Devs abilities. Other eras it was marketing. Peripherals it can be hard but then again Sony did EyeToy before Kinect, even EyeToy Kinetic came before Wii Fit. The Super FX chip besides the SNES did everything but not CPU speed. So the SNES is more powerful no contest. If even GPU counts or RAM and such even if GPU/CPU matter for power I'd say. Sega had it's unique 3D Virtua Racing use of a special chip and others like Star Fox/Yoshi's Island. Of course CD and 32X too is a lot of confusion I like the idea of them but yeah bad move even if something cool to look back on in history. I mean did Sega Channel and Satelliview do much not likely. FMV was a time yes, other platforms have their purpose but yeah too expensive and while powerful they are different in their greatness and uniqueness for niche audiences. But Marketing, CD/DVD timing so PS1/2 were suitable. Saturn yes was 2D key greatness even if 3D was possible for many games. Weakest makes sense and designing up. These days it's different in a way though somewhat. But also sales/audience size besides yes lowest hardware. Yep cartridge limits and of course N64 graphics only go so far on those limits. Still GBA/Virtual Boy were 32bit but mostly 16bit style games and early 3D style on GBA then DS being N64 like or NGage as PS1/GBA. But yeah Dreamcast was early and of course but of course PS1 and N64 to Dreamcast made it good for ports but yeah too early and only had slightly nicer graphics. GameCube, PS2 and Xbox that got Dreamcast games or IPs for sure makes it possible to compare but yeah if Dreamcast was the lowest would have been interesting if it was around and not discontinued even if it got games till 2007 but niche titles of course. That and well Dreamcast backwards compatibility on Xbox would have been nice but nope. New platforms and better developer deals they didn't communicate well but also yes Japanese and US differences I mean Atari is US so..... Can go either way. But yeah streaming these days is everywhere with their Apple TV/Fire TV or Roku or otherwise boxes/TVs or tablets. Even if on the consoles is a nice bonus. But still Neflix on all and of course 360 with lcie gold is hilarious. I hate when people show the Genji PS3 clip. He said based. Aka like any movie or game based means it was inspired or used as a base not 100% accurate but people are too dumb when they meme because why not put any quote forward for their stupidity to take words seriously. Besides the game is good but like people care just what is memorable aka make fun then actually care and then we wonder why games are safe, bland and repeating is laughing and creative games unless niche or indie ignored if it's a big studio making something not generic and realistic and this and that as if that's all power is. Then again real rules/logic is easier for people to judge then elements too technical for them. Or nerdy even. Forget stylising it has to be real or else. I mean I like console gimmics because we don't get experimental games sometimes. Sixth gen all experimental and not standardised but plain controllers besides PS2 buttons being analogue. While now unless it's motion or touch, AR/VR, Rumble in more controlled ways of Haptics/HD/Impulse Triggers or something else which I enjoy but says a lot. Not AI/Animation/World gen and more the actual impressive stuff just graphics because it's the easiest thing to complain about as the others are too technical for the average person to understand or care. It's not hard to tell but for many people it is or they are content enough with standard animations and AI I assume. Me I want dynamic elements and better AI or animation I don't mind the standards but eh they do get boring and done to death see through of cutscenes, gameplay and other factors as games, even the cough realism I mean I can spot Ubisoft and other artists models easily and how real or so they are they aren't convincing if you are used to games and see through things but are if people don't know any better aka casuals but to gamers we can pinpoint them easily who made them studio or staff level of they follow their work closely enough. XD Even outside 4:3 video cutscenes in collections of PS2 games to modern platforms aka Devil May Cry for example.the 4:3 videos of item pickups and cutscenes. PS3 worked with Blu ray over HD DVD and HD VMD (one that is lesser known). 360 was cheaper and made sense for online too. DRM and other elements for Xbox One made people vocally easy to make Sony win not the power. That and how the camera was never got counted even if PS4/Kinect are similar in a way. I mean 3DS had marketing Vita barely did. PSP I mean it's a media console and the NGage, Gizmondo and Tapwave Zodiac are better than add-ons to the PSP but didn't convince much, but it's audience of older while DS was what it was. GP32 or whichever it was is less known but existed. Game library with appealing games aka ones that are cool in how they sound to people or ads, less fantasy or sci-fi rules because those are too technical or nerdy in some cases and more slice of life or action movie understood. Or violence/cool appeal. Backwards compatibility people don't even care about it has to be NEW. Cinematic games are boring to me but oh games like movies easy for casuals to get it. Oh youtubers. Oh people saying chrome (the browser with a right side pandering mention on the popular search engine because oh needs say good or whatever else even like the average person knows Google did better search results so the cooler talked about people seek out for word of mouth). Graphics are something but most people can't tell how they look compared to those with a keen eye or sources that are trustworthy besides if people just throw words around.

[@juststatedtheobvious9633]

The 2600 wasn't super successful until they got that Space Invaders exclusive license. The Intellivision was obscenely expensive, and Coleco went bankrupt thanks to poor decisions like the ADAM. Altered Beast on Master System was good? Since when? The CDI was more powerful than the SNES and Genesis....No. Just no. Read up on the sprite and playfield limitations.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

The 2600 won its generation and had a good lead in time over the Intellivision and ColecoVision. Their cost and the inevitable crash meant we never saw the fight continue around round with them. My first console was a Master System, so maybe my memories of Altered Beast are rose tinted 😂 And yeah maybe that’s fair that the CDi wasn’t overall more powerful, but that may be because of poor non game focussed design. I know there were various models (I owned two of them) and sometimes the specs changed but believe it had more ram, capable of more colours and had other advantages

[@juststatedtheobvious9633]

@@GeekBattleGaming Thanks for an honest, and very relatable, reply. The 2600 was my first console, and Defender the first game I bought with my own money. In my mind, the city at night will always be the true setting...even if the port's actual quality makes Pac-Man look good. And yeah, the CDi was easy to market as an up grade, for all the reasons you named. But you reminded me of something...did you know many multiplats were combining the weaknesses of SNES and Genesis? The SNES had an 8-bit databus to worry about, and kept rigid limits on how you could use sprite tiles. (2 sizes per screen, 16kb limit at a time) The Genesis had more flexibility, but had a bizarre low resolution mode that allowed fewer sprites, despite being less demanding. Still, it shared that lower resolution with the SNES, so, if you were really lazy... Another trick, as seen in titles like Earthworm Jim 1, was to take a slice of Genesis assets, throw them into the SNES unaltered, and then act surprised when it stretched them a lot wider. The internal SNES hardware doesn't actually use a 4:3 aspect ratio, hence the modern trend of offering an 8:7 option. It's subtle nuances like these that make console wars closer than they first appear. Another fun example is the Master System being unable to flip spites. If you want Alex Kidd to walk left, or punch left, that's valuable ROM space that can't go elsewhere. It's probably why Golden Axe is only using background tiles.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@juststatedtheobvious9633 that makes so much sense that multi platform games would be reduced to the limits of both consoles rather than take advantage of either! Really good spot there!

[@fawkewe]

“More powerful consoles always loose” The Wii U:

[@GeekBattleGaming]

Watch the video. PS4 beat Wii U and Xbox One, but most powerful system was the Xbox One X. Doesn’t matter though as the Switch outsold them all despite being less powerful

[@nigelsreptarachnids5931]

How is $189 worth $449 and $199 worth $430?? 😅

[@GeekBattleGaming]

I’m not sure what you’re referring to? Or is it a riddle???

[@TheMahayanist]

Are you talking about inflation?

[@UnvisibleINK]

SNES had more on screen colours and a higher fidelity sound chip, Megadrive was faster, controls were snappier and it could handle more sprites and animations on screen at once before coming close to the "chugging" that the SNES is famous for. So which is more powerful? How do you weigh the different factors? Is a high spec machine really powerful at all if it's a nightmare to program for like the Atari Jaguar? You'd have been better off actually analyzing the different timing and marketing factors that benefited different companies at different times rather than going all flat earth reaching for a common thread that doesn't even exist assuming your assertion that the SNES is more powerful than the Megadrive holds any water. You could even argue that being so easy to program for, the Playstation was more powerful than the N64. Yeah I know, but bits-schmits, if you're struggling to get the best performance out of one console's architecture but the "less powerful" one can easily be overclocked and tricked into performing tasks well above its processing grade, then there's an argument to be made. It's like muscle power vs brain power, how do you even grade them against each other accurately when they go about performing their tasks so differently?

[@GeekBattleGaming]

Yeah I hear all your points. The SNES Vs Mega Drive was always going to be the closest and know there’s games on each that support the argument for each being most powerful. I do think I looked at the various factors such as when consoles came out, the inclusion of media players, backwards compatibility and the perception each company had in the market place at the time. But my argument in the video is that most powerful consoles don’t usually win, and I acknowledge that things like storage and being developed friendly can be seen as strengths, but that’s not usually what is meant by power. You can build a game more easily for the NES than you can for the PS5, but that isn’t a sign that the NES is more powerful. Just simpler to use.

[@UnvisibleINK]

@@GeekBattleGaming Maybe it sounded like I thought you didn't look into other details. If so I apologize because you definitely discussed some of the factors at play during each console generation. What I was suggesting was that distinguishing which console is the most "powerful" is a weird hair to split considering some consoles were tilted toward graphics and sound, others performance, scrolling and load times etc. Especially if you're gonna discount the Neo Geo during the not entirely 16 bit generation, it's just too arbitrary at that point. I mean, the Neo Geo not being popular isn't very sensational news but at least it supports your argument. Any power difference between Sony and Xbox is negligible by comparison, so the parameters and definitions were inconsistent. Seemed like the argument was striving to find some interesting esoteric common thread to discuss across all the console generations instead of just doing the interesting thing of trying to put your finger on why a certain console met (or created) a market demand better than the rest at various points in time. I still think other aspects of the video had merit, otherwise I wouldn't have bothered with my two cents.

[@STEJTHEGREATEST]

What about the SNES??// That was more powerful than the Megadrive, and even though they both thrived, I remember reading once that the SNES had the biggest buyrates, overall!!!!!

[@GeekBattleGaming]

Ah keep watching. I cover that very topic 😃

[@Bakamoichigei]

"More powerful" depends on your perspective. The Mega Drive had the faster, more sophisticated CPU. The thing is the Super Famicom had the more sophisticated system architecture, better audio (saying something, considering the MD had a Yamaha synth chip!) it was easier to develop for (not that there's a huge difference between 6502 assembly and 68K assembly, but anybody who coded for the Famicom/NES could hit the ground running with the SFC/SNES) and more third party developer support. In the end, the Mega Drive had more raw horsepower, but the Super Famicom yielded superior _results_ through a number of factors.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@Bakamoichigei interesting points! The SNES Vs Mega Drive was always going to be the closest match up across the generations. I always like the Mega Drive audio quality but think the SNES clearly bettered it and from the games I can think of that appeared on both I’d give the edge to SNES too. Only by a hair though. Things like the later Mortal Kombats or NBA Hangtime. And of course it didn’t help the Sega cause when Doom released on the SNES with the Super FX chip but you needed the 32X to play Doom on Mega Drive

[@superavel]

Because people want games. When you delay your consoles by a year or two, its obviously more powerful but you miss out on a year or two of games. If i wantes specs Ill buy a PC.

[@cryonics4566]

how much to bet there isn't an actual logical explanation found in this video.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

😂 watch it and you’ll find there’s several explanations throughout. There isn’t just one reason, but different circumstances every generation

[@SeanUCF]

Why comment if you're not going to watch?

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@SeanUCF 🤣 that’s what I thought.

[@STEJTHEGREATEST]

The Neo Geo was far too expensive for anyone but the richest kids to have!!!! The new games were more expensive than the actual Megadrive and SNES consoles, themselves!!!!

[@GeekBattleGaming]

So true. I’m pleased there’s lots of ways to get Neo Geo games now. Love my mini Neo Geo arcade machine. It’s just a shame that they couldn’t have figured out how to make it cheaper so more people had it back in the day. It would have lead to more games for it

[@katseazzz]

neo geo is still the most expensive console even more than ps5 and xbsx

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@katseazzz wouldn’t surprise me. On eBay they’re so expensive and can’t imagine what it’s original price adjusted for 2023 would be

[@victorperfecto7472]

Sony cannot touch handheld

[@mr.tie-rex9577]

It’s surprising the Wii won the 7th Gen.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

They wowed everyone with the motion controls. It was so fresh and new and they had a much cheaper system as they didn’t jump on HD and as advanced hardware

[@TheMahayanist]

It wasn't actually all that surprising. Nintendo just replicated in the home console/casual market what they did for handheld gaming. What's more surprising is that Xbox failed to replicate that market and lost the 8th generation.

[@pokepress]

Regarding the 360/PS3/Wii generation, I think it’s important to note that for a lot of folks, you needed a new TV to get the full benefit of the HD consoles. That was much less common at the start of the generation than the end.

[@j-morecoffeepls]

I believe that even though the Wii sold more units worldwide, the 360 actually “won” the 7th generation.

[@owenp9060]

Still can't help being of the opinion that PS1 was "more powerful " than N64. Look at games at end of generation and PlayStation looked best, not even including FMV, sound, etc.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

PSOne definitely had some advantages but in terms of raw power N64 was 64-bit, had expandable ram, instant loading times. PSOne had CDs for extra storage and maybe could do textures better and could have FMVs and better music.

[@owenp9060]

@@GeekBattleGaming expandable RAM can't count surely! Nor instant loading times. N64 games were permanently clouded in a soft edges sort of look, even for 2D titles. I've also heard that Squaresoft actually chose PS1 for FFVII because of 3D capabilities, not just storage and FMV. Makes me sound like a console fan boy I know but compare MGS and Gran Turismo 2 with Ocarina of Time - just the in game graphics I mean. Think it was to do with developers better understanding how to push the PS1. The N64 ceiling definitely felt lower.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

⁠@@owenp9060I’d count expandable ram, but understand why others wouldn’t. It’d be like not counting Star Fox for the SNES because it has the Super FX chip. If something was playable on the console I’d count it otherwise you couldn’t count DK64, Perfect Dark or Majora’s Mask. The PSOne was best for games with pre-rendered graphics like Final Fantasy or Resident Evil, but that mostly comes down to extra storage space. Instant loading times made things like Hyrule Field possible on N64 that wasn’t possible on PSOne. Even later PSOne platformers like Spyro couldn’t have as expansive worlds as Mario 64 and Banjo. DK64 and Banjo Tooie pushed the huge levels too far though. The N64 was much more powerful but had areas that let it down like blur, fog and muddy graphics but the PSOne was known for its jaggies.

[@Masonicon]

​@@owenp9060actually the reason Squaresoft choose PS1 instead of N64 for FF7 was: N64 version of FF7 will use 13 cartridges

[@SamsonSilvo]

@@Masonicon This. Squaresoft's entire reason for choosing PS1 over N64 was because of the latter used expensive proprietary cartridges that only held up to 64MB (and even then 32MB was more common with 64MB carts not being used until pretty much the very end of the N64's lifespan) while the PS1 used cheap to mass produce CD-ROM's that could hold up to 650MB.

[@aminparker01]

任天堂は、マイクロソフトやソニーよりも強力な IP を持っています。ソニーやマイクロソフトは、マリオ、ポケモン、ゼルダの伝説と競争できる IP を持っているのでしょうか? 任天堂は、ビデオ ゲーム業界のディズニーです。象徴的な IP を無視してきたディズニーのような運営はしていません。象徴的な ゲームIP をすべて所有しています。

[@kierenbuckley370]

Funny because PS1 and PS4 were the more powerful platforms when they were out over the competition and are huge success

[@GeekBattleGaming]

The PS1 wasn’t more powerful than the Nintendo 64. PS4 was more powerful than Xbox One, but the story isn’t as simple as that as I go into if you see that section of the video

[@TheMahayanist]

PS4 only won because it was the first generation where all companies dropped the ball, and because hardcore gamers wanted revenge on Xbox and Nintendo. But Switch came round the second time and thumped Sony.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@TheMahayanist the PS4 generation was complicated in that through the mid generation refresh it ended up not the most powerful and there’s the question where the Switch should sit generationally. Was it a second console from Nintendo in the same generation or was it the start of the PS5 generation as it was years ahead.

[@TheMahayanist]

@@GeekBattleGaming I say that it's a eighth generation console in a ninth generation market. I don't see why it has to be one or the other.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@TheMahayanist the lines are certainly blurred but it’s also awkward with the switch partly due to its position as both a horn and handheld console. It’s easy to say after the failure of the Wii u Nintendo released a second eighth generation console, but that creates the issue of whether the Wii should be seen as a second sixth generation console as it was essentially the GameCube again. Then with the Wii U being at Xbox 360 and PS3 level you could argue that the Wii U was power wise a seventh generation console in which case you could say the Switch is also a seventh generation console as it’s closer to Wii U than the PS4 and Xbox One. But of course just as the PS5 is acknowledged as the fifth generation PlayStation by Sony and they kinda ignore the generations before they existed in their marketing, the Switch is absolutely the eighth generation Nintendo console after the range of TV Color Game systems, Famicom/NES, Super Famicom/SNES, N64, GameCube, Wii, Wii U and then Switch. So it may be that the Switch is a separate generation Nintendo console to Wii U, but both are seen in the same overall console generation. It just starts to get messy

[@pavilionlakebooks8479]

For mk1 snes had better graphics mega drive only saving grace was the the blood code

[@GeekBattleGaming]

Ah the blood code. Imagine if all games needed that today 😂

[@pavilionlakebooks8479]

@@GeekBattleGaming I was happy to use the pit without using a blood code on the snes

[@alexstroud7250]

Comes down to cost not games. Ps was cheeper then the Saturn, ps2 was cheeper then Xbox, ps3 cost more then 360, ps4 was cheeper then Xbox one

[@GeekBattleGaming]

There’s an element of that, but not just that as cost didn’t always guarantee success. GameCube was cheaper than the competition, as was Wii U when PS4 and XBox One released. Saturn and N64 had price drops at least on par if not below PSOne but it didn’t turn things around. You could get a Dreamcast and a DVD player combo for cheaper than a PS2 but nothing helped that stay afloat

[@alexstroud7250]

@@GeekBattleGaming Nintendo after the snes was more of its own thing and made there own games and didn’t try to compete with Microsoft and Sony. A price drop is to late at that point. Also Sega master system was all you could really get in uk

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@alexstroud7250 Nintendo stayed in the power wars with the N64 being more powerful then the pS1 and Saturn and they did out power the Dreamcast and PS2, but were behind where the Xbox was. It was with the Wii that they hanged course to their famous blue ocean approach which didn’t fight in terms of power but innovation.

[@alexstroud7250]

@@GeekBattleGaming the n64 was released after the ps1 and Saturn so that’s not true

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@alexstroud7250 how so? It was in the same generation. It was the direct competitor to both the PS1 and the Saturn

[@LUCKO2022]

I don't agree with the Master System having better sound than the NES not counting the FM syth games like Double Dragon but that was rarely used. NES usually sounded better than Master System.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

It may depend on the game and what results developers got out of the hardware. When I look at games on both like The Lion King I feel it’s night and day that the Master System had better audio, but the NES audio is iconic also

[@anss321]

@GeekBattleGaming The NES sound chip can do everything the SMS sound chip can do and then some, so it's objectively superior. IOW, the NES they can make the same tones as the SMS but gives the musicians more options. The NES also have an extra sound channel, but most games do not use it for music. One notable exception is Super Mario Bros 3 that uses it for its drumb track. The FM chip changes things up, but there are actually Family Computer games with FM music.

[@GeekBattleGaming]

@@anss321 can you think of any examples of games that sound better on NES? Sure there are iconic tunes like Zelda and Mario, but the composition isn’t the point. I think the audio quality on master system sounded way better

[@anss321]

@@GeekBattleGaming I don't actually own the hardware, never have, so I can't say if the analog quality of the SMS is better or worse. Back in my kid days I do remember finding SMS games to have less varity in their selection of tones. Curious as to why, I looked it up fairly recently, and the technical explanation is that the SMS chip only generates square waves while the NES can do Square and triangle, along with more frequencies. The SMS sound chip is an off the shelf part that you can find in Sega's earlier console, the SG1000 (that was released alongside the Famicom in 1983), as well as the Tandy 1000 computer, along with a bunch of other systems. It's quite well known, and I've heard really good tunes played on it. It is a very capable little chip but if a musician wishes, he can coax the exact same tones out the NES. What you prefer is ultimately subjective, though. Listen to Journey To Silius if you want to hear the NES pushing out music you'd not think possible.

[@captain3186]

NES's Sound kicks the ever loving snot out of Master Systems awful ear piercing beeps and boops lol