• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

How important is a powerful console?

L

LizardKing

Member
So, how important is power in consoles? I see a lot of people saying how power doesn't matter and the "winner" in each generation of consoles didn't have the most power or best graphics of that generation(oddly true). But to say that power doesn't matter is wrong imo. The more powerful system in each generation has had unique games to take advantage of it's power giving it certain advantages over it's competition game wise.

Some advantages the systems that lost, but had the most power, recieved...

(ranked in order of power)
8- Bit
Master System (to be honest i don't know much about the master system. maybe someone can fill it in)
NES

16-Bit
Genesis (Lost, but had the best EA sports games giving the system immense popularity in the US. Also had the best effects for side scrollers giving rise to sonic. without the power of the genesis, you can't say sonic or other side scrollers would be as good as they were)

SNES

32/64-bit
N64 (Lost, but because of the 3d capabilities of the N64 it was the first real system of FPS games. no FPS on playstation could touch games like goldeneye and perfect dark. Also had the best platforming capabilities. Could you imagine Mario 64 on playstation?)

Playstation

current gen
xbox (Lost to playstation 2, but i think a lot of the reason it fared better than the gamecube in the US was because of the superior power. There is no question that exclusive games were developed for it because it was the most powerful console (ninja team), and it always helps that developers want to use the best looking version of their game to sell copies which happens to be on the xbox this gen.)

gamecube

playstation 2


So what do you guys think? I'm not just making the argument that better graphics = better games, but sometimes the power of the console can open up gaming possiblities (genesis, n64) and draw exclusives and attention of gamers (all of them). So how important is the power of the console?
 
LizardKing said:
So what do you guys think? I'm not just making the argument that better graphics = better games, but sometimes the power of the console can open up gaming possiblities (genesis, n64) and draw exclusives and attention of gamers (all of them). So how important is the power of the console?
Click to expand...

I also think it can be important if the gap is large. We haven't seen that this gen, but if multiplatform games looks significantly worse on one platform vs. another (to casuals) than I think the public perception of the platform would suffer.
 
I think having powerful hardware is semi-important to the extent that certain developers are always attracted to developing games on the highest spec kit for any given generation....take Team Ninja for example....they have a lot less competiton on Xbox since games like DMC or Tekken or Virtua Fighter reside on less powerful hardware......they get a higher proportion of potential sales on Xbox because of this...

OTOH, the console with the highest user base gets the biggest VOLUME of great games.....you will always get a good amount of gems on the top dog hardware, but the hardware with the largest amount of users usually are host to an embarrasment of riches as far as great games are concerned...


Moving forward to next gen, you *might* see the console with the highest user base and the console with most hardware power be the same product (PS3)...which is the first time this has happened in, like.....well....ever....
 
I don´t think raw power is that important. I think it´s much more important what you do with that power. Of course, the more power the better, but having the most advanced machine doesn´t always equal having the most advanced games. For istance, in this generation, eventhough the gap was significant from PS2 to Xbox, the only games that couldn´t be made in the PS2 are those using the hard drive, and it´s not a matter of power at all.
 
nine words said:
I don´t think raw power is that important. I think it´s much more important what you do with that power. Of course, the more power the better, but having the most advanced machine doesn´t always equal having the most advanced games. For istance, in this generation, eventhough the gap was significant from PS2 to Xbox, the only games that couldn´t be made in the PS2 are those using the hard drive, and it´s not a matter of power at all.
Click to expand...

.
 
For istance, in this generation, eventhough the gap was significant from PS2 to Xbox, the only games that couldn´t be made in the PS2 are those using the hard drive, and it´s not a matter of power at all.
Click to expand...

I cant think of a single game that took advantage of the harddrive and as a result couldnt be ported to ps2. Please list some.
 
Red Scarlet said:
You consider the Genesis more powerful than the SNES? Isn't what you mean to say is its faster processor?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I thought it was pretty widely accepted that the SNES was the superior hardware in that gen. Maybe not, though..
 
I would definitely consider SNES more powerful. The bit-depth, effects, and audio put it over the top. Genesis games almost all ran at higher resolution, though.
 
My impression from the time was that the SNES had better graphics capabilities, but the Genesis was faster; the net result being that the SNES had the perceived advantage (how do you market less slowdown? I guess by pimping "blast processing?")...
 
TAJ said:
I would definitely consider SNES more powerful. The bit-depth, effects, and audio put it over the top. Genesis games almost all ran at higher resolution, though.
Click to expand...


Rather, the Snes and Genny had their respective strengths. The genesis was the place to be for the arcade games. Like, can you imagne them trying to do Shinobi 3 on SNES. Visaversa, trying to pull of Super Metroid on SNES?

Crazy.
 
The Genesis and SNES were both powerful in their own ways. The Genesis had a blindingly fast processor at the time. The SNES one was a lot slower, but this was made up by better color depth and the GPU. Mode 7 was a big selling point back then if I recall, and that allowed for hardware scaling and rotation of BGs. The Genesis could do this too, though it had to do all of this via CPU. The fast CPU had its own advantages too. Think about this: Do any of you honestly think Gunstar Heroes could've been pulled off in its current form on the SNES? I can say that it'd pretty much be impossible without slow down...

In other words: Genesis = SNES >_>
 
Lets just say that a more powerful console will help it more than if it was weaker. How much it will help I dunno and depends on several different factors and is pretty complex I would think to explain here if anyone could do it in the first place.
 
At E3, this forum was brought to a crippling halt due to the incredible gameplay demonstrated in the KZ3 video. At TGS, this forum was brought to its knees by the unbelievable gameplay displayed in the MGS4 trailer. Conclusion: Gameplay is more important than graphics. PD0 FTW. PEACE.
 
Well yeah, Genesis and SNES had thier own strengths for different games. I know that EA sports games were superior on genesis and of course games like metroid or DKC would be better on SNES. Just differently built systems, but it shows how the parts inside can influence the games made
 
Genesis was good at running uglier games fast, with usually lower resolution and a lot less colors (only 64 onscreen at once). It could do more sprites onscreen. This is because of a ~7 mhz processor. Super Nintendo was better for games like RPG's with lots of colors (256 onscreen at once) and detail but slower moving. Early SNES games like Super Ghouls n Ghosts had massive amounts of slowdown because of the slow processor (~3 mhz) Super Nintendo did have many other advantages like Mode 7 and the ability of Super FX add on chips. Genesis never had effects like Mode 7 unless you got a Sega CD. Also SNES had a much better sound chip.
 
In the overall 5-year console cycle (sorry MS), it's not very important.

Main reason is average gamers can't tell the differences. But if you got it, it doesn't hurt to flaunt it.
 
Kleegamefan said:
I think having powerful hardware is semi-important to the extent that certain developers are always attracted to developing games on the highest spec kit for any given generation....take Team Ninja for example....
Click to expand...

You didn't really believe that load, did you?
 
LizardKing said:
So, how important is power in consoles? I see a lot of people saying how power doesn't matter and the "winner" in each generation of consoles didn't have the most power or best graphics of that generation(oddly true). But to say that power doesn't matter is wrong imo. The more powerful system in each generation has had unique games to take advantage of it's power giving it certain advantages over it's competition game wise.
Click to expand...

While I think power is definitely a factor in how well a console will do, something I thought was important was capacity. From catridges to CDs to DVDs, something that successful consoles have generally had were larger capacity. Something that sticks out in my mind is how the PS2 beat out DC despite DC having a great library, but only used CDs. Sure this isn't always the case (like Jaguar/3DO), but generally each generation uses a new storage format.
 
>I cant think of a single game that took advantage of the harddrive and as a result couldnt be ported to ps2. Please list some.

You are not thinking very hard.
 
The perception of power is much more important than the actual power of a console.

RIP Dreamcast.
 
Every winning system had the best third party support of its generation. The winner will be the system with the most games that spark interest in the general public.
 
GitarooMan said:
Yeah, I thought it was pretty widely accepted that the SNES was the superior hardware in that gen. Maybe not, though..
Click to expand...


The Genesis was capable of some surprising stuff through little tricks and its faster processor, but there's no question the SNES was a more powerful, better rounded and better featured system.
But you can still, to this day, find people who'll argue otherwise. I ran across a site once which claimed the Genesis even had superior SOUND, which is just insane! Complete with really shitty sound samples that were supposed to convince you...
 
To the average gamer? Not at all, as long as it can produce decent visuals and fun games. To console fanboys who enjoy whose-dick-is-bigger contests? It's everything. :lol
 
For istance, in this generation, eventhough the gap was significant from PS2 to Xbox, the only games that couldn´t be made in the PS2 are those using the hard drive, and it´s not a matter of power at all.
Click to expand...

This was the original quote. The only game that would have been impossible to port to ps2 because of the lack of a harddrive was Blinx. Even that is questionable because Prince of Persia used the same type of thing (ive never played blinx so im not 100% sure about that). The difference in power played a much larger role in what games got ported and what didnt.

Jet Set Radio Future, I think.
Click to expand...

Jet Set Radio ran fine without it on dreamcast.

You are not thinking very hard.
Click to expand...

What else other than Blinx?
 
TAJ said:
I would definitely consider SNES more powerful. The bit-depth, effects, and audio put it over the top. Genesis games almost all ran at higher resolution, though.
Click to expand...

what u smoking..the genesis had some of the worst resolution on any console..
 
TheDuce22 said:
I cant think of a single game that took advantage of the harddrive and as a result couldnt be ported to ps2. Please list some.
Click to expand...

Doom 3, Halo 1/2, Half Life 2,Farcry, Ninja Gaiden, KoTOR, Jade Empire...etc
I bet that the lack of a standard HDD will affect the X360 with later ports of PC games
 
For istance, in this generation, eventhough the gap was significant from PS2 to Xbox, the only games that couldn´t be made in the PS2 are those using the hard drive, and it´s not a matter of power at all.
Click to expand...



Heck, you can make Doom 3, Far Cry Instinct, Halo 2, Riddick, Conker, Ninja Gaiden, Splinter Cell Chaos Theory Xbox version etc. on the PS2.

However, seeing the assets of those specific games, I don't think that would be a very good idea.

And I think I remember that Jet Set Radio Future used the Xbox HD to load those massive levels, which easily rival the huge levels in other titles on the PS2.
 
Being powerful IS important. More powerful, versatile hardware will garner you more support.

As for the whole Genesis/SNES debate, the SNES was unquestionably more powerful. It could do 16-bit color without breaking a sweat, had unrivaled mode-7 graphics, and was the first console to have a dedicated sound chip (the genesis only had crappy midi output through the CPU).

Hands down, better. The sound chip alone was enough to make it a better system.
 
There would surely be ways of getting around abilities that other consoles have, it just takes a little more work to do it. There have been so many games that come out claiming "can only be done on X system". I mean, there were plenty of games for the 64DD that could have easily been done on the bog standard N64. Stuff like the Famicom Disk System ended up being bunk when it was released in America with saving...

and despite the lack of colours avaliable on the Megadrive, The Sonic games look a hell of a lot better than Super Mario World. SMW was just so.. basic in it's approach. Hell, Mario still had 3 animations to use when walking or running. Sonic had, what, 8? Sonic tunes were a lot more "full" than Mario's music as well, but both were incrediby catchy :)
 
Culex said:
Being powerful IS important. More powerful, versatile hardware will garner you more support.

As for the whole Genesis/SNES debate, the SNES was unquestionably more powerful. It could do 16-bit color without breaking a sweat, had unrivaled mode-7 graphics, and was the first console to have a dedicated sound chip (the genesis only had crappy midi output through the CPU).
Click to expand...

No, not 16-bit colour. QUICK SNES SPEC RECAP:

CPU: 16-bit 65816 (3.58MHz)
RAM: 128KB (1Mb), 64KB (0.5Mb) Video RAM
Graphics: Dedicated graphics processor
Colours: 32768 colour palette, 256 on screen = 8-bit colour
Sprites: 128
Sprite Size: 64x64 pixels
Resolution: 512x448 pixels (maximum)
Sound: 8-channel 8-bit Sony SPC700 digitized sound (Kutaragi's child)
 
choppy animation and low res textures bother me. bad ai can completely ruin a game sometimes.

there was nothing worse than starting gang wars in san andreas, and spending 5 minutes waiting for gang members to figure out how to get around a building, making their way from one block to the next one over. or looking around a corner to see a group of them bumping into eachother and running in circles trying to get around eachother.

i dont know if its because rockstar cant write ai worth shit or if because even the xbox doesnt have enough power to run the game with decent ai, but im sure more powerful hardware would at least help in a situation like that...
 
Doom 3, Halo 1/2, Half Life 2,Farcry, Ninja Gaiden, KoTOR, Jade Empire...etc
I bet that the lack of a standard HDD will affect the X360 with later ports of PC games
Click to expand...

The harddrive had nothing to do with those games not being ported to ps2. Most of those games only use it to decrease load times anyway.
 
aphasias said:
choppy animation and low res textures bother me. bad ai can completely ruin a game sometimes.

there was nothing worse than starting gang wars in san andreas, and spending 5 minutes waiting for gang members to figure out how to get around a building, making their way from one block to the next one over. or looking around a corner to see a group of them bumping into eachother and running in circles trying to get around eachother.

i dont know if its because rockstar cant write ai worth shit or if because even the xbox doesnt have enough power to run the game with decent ai, but im sure more powerful hardware would at least help in a situation like that...
Click to expand...


They're not going to remake the entire GTA game from the ground up just for the Xbox.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

How Come Mini PCs Are Smaller and More Powerful Than Modern Consoles?
2
79
1K
SScorpio replied
  • Poll
How important is game preservation to You?
2
52
1K
seething left replied
  • Poll
Outside of the games library, what aspect of a console is most important to you?
37
884
PlayStaytion replied
GameSpot: How Nintendo Won The Console War
Opinion Trailer Game Dev  2 3 4 5
221
1K
Topher replied
Xbox Series X/S: How NOT to Save a Console | ZackLillipad
Platform 
5
322
snapdragon replied
Top Bottom