Support NeoGAF

[Airola]

NES is better.

It has the better Mario games (no, All Stars is not an improvement in any way) and the better Mega Man games. The Mega Man X games just aren't that fun.

 

[The Lunch Legend]

You do realize that the game sold in the US as "Super Mario Brothers 2" wasn't really even a Mario game? It originated as a game called Doki Doki Panic on the Famicom Disc System - it was tweaked an reskinned into a Mario game because Nintendo were concerned that the level of difficulty of the Japanese market Mario 2 would be unacceptable to US and European gamers. Having said that, it was eventually released in Japan as "Super Mario USA" and was also included on the SNES Super Mario Collection cart.

Yes, we all know this. Thank you, Professor.

 

[Trimesh]

If you go deeper. Mario Team built Doki Doki Panic on top of a Mario prototype engine. So it went:

Mario Prototype > Doki Doki Panic > Super Mario Bros 2.

So technically, it was always a Mario game.

That's really pushing it, IMO - the original experimental engine was a pure vertical scrolling engine that was pretty much completely unlike the Mario games - it was only after it was decided to use it in the project for Fuji TV that Miyamoto suggested adding the Mario-style horizonal scrolling in. About the only "Mario like" things in the original prototype were some of the placeholder graphics that were the same as the ones used in Mario for the simple reason it was done by the same development team. Admittedly, it clearly is a Mario game now because a lot of the original Doki Doki Panic characters that were used in Mario 2 have become recurring parts of the series.

I think we can agree that the game first came out as Doki Doki Panic and that the gameplay is pretty much unchanged in the version that was sold as Super Mario 2.

 

[RoboFu]

That’s a hard one if you lived it.. it’s like choosing between the Beatles and the many great bands influenced by the Beatles.

nes had a lot of mind blowing moments

SNES had better games and some mind blowing moments as well.

I would have to go with the SNES over all.

 

[ProgenitorCastle]

Can’t really make a comparison. NES mostly has still very arcadey, simple games, while SNES is the generation where games started becoming longer, more complex and engrossing, but also less immediate, less “pure”.

Like, I love Megaman X1 to bits, but no MM game that came after the NES recaptured the same feeling and gameplay of the original series - with the exception of the phenomenal MM9, and I don’t have to tell you that MM9 is basically a NES game.

Many problems in NES games came from lack of refinement and QoL features, plus the retarded changes to balance and difficulty a lot of games underwent in the transition from Japan to US because of rentals. Games like Metroid and Kid Icarus are significantly better in their original Disk System version thanks to saves - passwords were a chore to write down, and to this day I swear some passwords I did copy correctly didn’t work. Imagine how my heart sank when a password from the second-to-last level in Kid Icarus didn’t work. But apart from these problems, those games are still fun to play. Metroid was a little less brutal in its Japanese version too, I’d love for Nintendo to make those FDS versions available outside Japan at last.

When SNES came along, the widespread adoption of battery saves meant games had to become longer to not be completed over a weekend, but it also meant they got more bloated. And many games were still rooted in 8-bit gameplay anyway. The Super Famicom Dragon Quest games still had all the grinding and the limited saves of their NES precursors, and were mostly much longer and more bloated. FF4 is a NES game on steroids. Basically, all the game genres that were typical of home gaming got undeniably better in the 16-bit era, but also lost something in their evolution. People fawn over Castlevania IV, but I find that game slow and boring compared to CV3 (or even the original, which I never completed without savestates but it’s great to kill half an hour).

On the other hand, purely arcade games really bloomed on SNES. NES ports from arcades simply couldn’t compete with the originals unless the game was specifically repurposed for the home version, like Contra. But space shooters on the SNES are leagues better than almost every single one of their NES counterparts, from Parodius to R-Type to... practically anything you can name. There‘s very few shooters I can play for more than 5 minutes on the NES, but on the 16-bits (and the PC-Engine) I can spend days blasting space monsters into oblivion. And fighting games, well... the NES had Double Dragon, OK, but the SNES had everything, and when one-on-one fighters exploded with SF2, the older hardware had nothing to come back to.

To answer OP’s question, I’ll have to go with SNES because when push comes to shove, there’s little I can replay to completion on the NES in its original state without savestates and such. Everything Megaman and Mario, sure, and Kid Icarus, and a few others. But it’s rare that I go that far into Metroid before ragequitting, and top-down NES RPGs are a chore (but please have a look into sideview action RPGs like Faxanadu or The Battle of Olympus, those are still great games). OTOH, I’ll rarely say no to a quick dive into SNES games when I don’t feel like playing for more than an hour.

This reply and some others I've seen too nail down why I'm currently preferring the NES. The games certainly do have a more immediate, simpler, arcade like feel to them. And that's what I dig alot in games, arcade-y stuff. Even if I can't fully beat the games...there's actually something freeing about that because well my backlog of games is pretty big anyway, so just being able to fire on a NES game and play some levels only is nostalgic feeling, like those old Nokia cell phone games. It actually felt like progress when you'd make it to a new level in them/in a NES game.

Huh...didn't know that about the FDS versions of the games, that they had more advanced features like saves and stuff. Would be nice to play those versions.

This reply in general shows how gaming evolved from NES to SNES...for better ways and worse. Thanks for sharing, NeoIkaruGAF.

 

[Allnamestakenlol]

This gif just totally killed my ability to follow this thread. Making me laugh so hard. xD

 

[Business]

The SNES catalogue absolutely destroys the NES. Very few things on the NES catalogue are still playable for me. SMB1, SMB3, Dr. Mario, maybe Punch Out... can‘t think of many more titles really and in any case these handful of games get obliterated by the SNES catalogue.

 

[Jeeves]

I'm using the term "trash" to be sensational, not literal. But yes, the original Metroid on the NES was the ground-breaking innovator. The SNES version is just Metroid with a pretty coat of paint, whilst adding very little in the way of innovation or impact.


I respect your opinions, nkarafo , but c'mon. SMB2 is far superior. SMB2 had a variety of characters, very unique gameplay, an awesome soundtrack, and some of the best aesthetics seen in a Mario game. SMB3 had, uh.. A Tanooki suit?

And just look at SMB2's awesome cover art:

You can't beat MARIO MADNESS!!

It kind of rubs me the wrong way that you seem to only be looking at superficial aspects when both Super Metroid and SMB3 beat their predecessors handily in terms of level design. That and you're valuing "impact" too much. Metroid is barely even playable, starting you with 30HP every time you die or continue the game (from a password!), yet you're saying it's the better game than Super Metroid, just because it was there first? You may as well say that none of these games have anything on Pong or Missile Command.

 

[-Arcadia-]

SNES for games I still want to play today; NES for impact and historical significance.

It’s a bit more complicated than that, because as previously mentioned, the NES has a lot of arcade-style/retro charm. Even something like Zelda is so simple and straightforward, that there’s a different kind of fun to it.

But generally, though.

 

[tsumake]

I’d argue:

- NES for platformers

- SNES for (J)RPGs

 

[teezzy]

Original Xbox

 

[kunonabi]

If were talking SNES to NES then my answer is NES. If we're including FC against SFC then I go the other way.

 

[Kokoloko85]

I love the Nes but Snes was better. The JRPG’s + Super Mario World etc

But Nes has so many cool classics from Tennis, Kung Fu, Mario 3, the Castlevania’s.... Both amazing consoles

 

[NeoIkaruGAF]

If were talking SNES to NES then my answer is NES. If we're including FC against SFC then I go the other way.

Please elaborate?

 

[teezzy]

Theres something very novel about playing games which were designed with only two buttons and a d pad in mind.

The SNES jrpg library is enough to have it win hands down for me, but I'm not by any stretch of the imagination someone who dislikes the NES library. Especially if you can run the games via emulator with QoL features like disabling the sprite limit of the original hardware etc.

 

[kunonabi]

Please elaborate?

The American NES library is full of a lot of crap. So is the FC library of course but it also has wealth of really good games that didn't make it over here. SNES has a much better ratio of quality titles compared to the NES but it doesn't have quite as many great titles that got left in Japan. So in terms of pure numbers FC edges out the SFC for me. I'd still say the SNES/SFC has higher highs regardless though.

 

[BlackTron]

SNES, but the SNES isn't what made me put the NES away a kid...

That was Genesis.

 

[molasar]

 

[Chastten]

As much as I appreciate the NES, the games haven't aged well at all for me personally. I played Super Mario Bros. 3, Kirby Adventure and Contra on the NES Mini but most other games on there just aren't doing it for me anymore.

The SNES on the other hand has a lot of games that still stand the test of time. Also, the controller doesnt hurt like hell after playing games for more than 15 minutes.

 

[cireza]

Would pick the NES without hesitation. Many legendary games and series debuted on it.

 

[NeoIkaruGAF]

The American NES library is full of a lot of crap. So is the FC library of course but it also has wealth of really good games that didn't make it over here. SNES has a much better ratio of quality titles compared to the NES but it doesn't have quite as many great titles that got left in Japan. So in terms of pure numbers FC edges out the SFC for me. I'd still say the SNES/SFC has higher highs regardless though.

Excuse me, but I’m a little confused here. You wrote this:

If were talking SNES to NES then my answer is NES. If we're including FC against SFC then I go the other way.

So if I’m getting this correctly, NES > SNES but SFC > FC.

Yet in your following post it seems you’re saying FC > SFC?

 

[theddub]

NES, never enjoyed the SNES as much, became more of a Genesis fan at that point

 

[SpiceRacz]

SNES has a stronger library, but I'll always prefer the NES. It's my favorite console of all time.

 

[kunonabi]

Excuse me, but I’m a little confused here. You wrote this:


So if I’m getting this correctly, NES > SNES but SFC > FC.

Yet in your following post it seems you’re saying FC > SFC?

What I meant to say is FC+SFC is better than NES+SNES but just SNES is better than just NES. That would have been very clear had I actually wrote my original post correctly, lol. My bad, lol.

 

[alabtrosMyster]

You do realize that the game sold in the US as "Super Mario Brothers 2" wasn't really even a Mario game?

Do you realize that this is probably why this is the best Super Mario Bros game ever made?

 

[Spokker]

I started with the NES as a kid but I am not really nostalgic for it. The games I remember playing the most were Pinball, Bart vs. The Space Mutants, Double Dare, Classic Concentration, Little Mermaid, Duck Tales, some Sesame Street game, and of course the Mario games. Every game I mentioned is seared into my brain, even if I'm not longing that much for them today.

I think I was in 6th grade when FF6 came out and that's where I put on my rose-colored glasses. That's when I started forming my opinions on what a good game is.

There are a few NES games that feel good to play, but I don't think they've aged as well as SNES games. SNES games aged so well that modern indie games try to emulate them.

 

[Rockondevil]

Head: snes
Heart: nes

I was struggling to put my feelings to words.
You have explained it perfectly.

 

[LavitzSlambert]

SNES for me and it’s not even close. Most NES games are an effort in pain to go back to, but SNES withstands the test of time. The NES controller is also simplistic and painful to hold, where as the SNES pad is still arguably the best 2D controller ever created.

 

[Fbh]

SNES for sure.
RPG's are what made me look at games more as a hobby than a toy and the SNES is vastly superior in that regard, with several gems that still hold up today.

I also prefer the SNES entries in a lot of big franchises like Zelda and Metroid.

 

[Trimesh]

Do you realize that this is probably why this is the best Super Mario Bros game ever made?

I am coming from the perspective of having played Doki Doki Panic - and in that context the US Super Mario 2 just looks like a low-effort reskin job. I'm not saying it was a bad game, but it does seem to be a very lazy piece of work. Yes, it's still better than the Japanese Super Mario 2 (which is basically Super Mario Bros with different and much harder levels).

 

[The Lunch Legend]

I am coming from the perspective of having played Doki Doki Panic - and in that context the US Super Mario 2 just looks like a low-effort reskin job. I'm not saying it was a bad game, but it does seem to be a very lazy piece of work. Yes, it's still better than the Japanese Super Mario 2 (which is basically Super Mario Bros with different and much harder levels).

What's with all this aggression?

 

[Trimesh]

What's with all this aggression?

I think you are projecting here. I'm just explaining why I always considered SMB2 (US) to be a low-effort product.

 

[Vagswarm]

SNES is miles ahead in quality (when it comes to everything), but the NES has some classics. For me it's not even close -- SNES. Just about every franchise was evolved in a big way, to become the best in its series (or close to it).

 

[The Lunch Legend]

I think you are projecting here. I'm just explaining why I always considered SMB2 (US) to be a low-effort product.

I bow down to your programming expertise.

pfft.

 

[teezzy]

I had an NES only from Xmas of 1993 until February 1997 when I was finally gifted an N64

That shit defined me. My cousin had Colecovision, the SNES, and PS1 - so I kinda got best of both worlds.

 

[Alex Anderson]

I kinda feel like I'd want to pick SNES but it has no games I love. I love Tecmo Super Bowl, Ice Hockey, Baseball Stars, and Golf. Love 'em.

 

[Trimesh]

I bow down to your programming expertise.

You don't need any "programming expertise" to see the two games are practically identical - all that's been changed is the graphics and one of the bosses. They also had to remove the extra audio channel that the FDS has (since the hardware doesn't exist) and change the disk load calls into paging requests to the MMC3 (and that FDS -> ROM conversion is one of the use cases that the MMC3 was specifically designed to cover).

Why all the passive-aggressive nonsense anyway? Are you actually angry that someone else doesn't like a game you do? In fact, I don't even think it's a bad game - just an indication of in how little regard Nintendo held the US market at the time since they thought it was OK to reskin an unrelated title as the second installment of their largest franchise for the US market.

 

[JoeyWestSide]

SNES by far! I had a ton of NES games that just never worked. Donkey Kong Country 1-3, Chrono Trigger, F Zero, Yoshi's Island and so many more are all amazing. Remember Return of the Jedi for SNES? It was quite hard and totally awesome! Mario, Super Sprint and Duck Hunt were pretty sweet but I remember playing Joust thinking, this SUCKS.

 

[alabtrosMyster]

What's with all this aggression?

He is right that they re-skinned an existing game and strapped Mario on it to sell more copies (even if it was a Mario prototype at some point).

I think it worked pretty well as a sequel tho, it had a more modern look, completely different gameplay and feel.

 

[NeoIkaruGAF]

I bow down to your programming expertise.

pfft.

To be fair, both games known as “Super Mario Bros. 2” are basically what we’d call romhacks these days, lol.

The US version is a reskin mod while the JP version is the first Kaizo Mario game in history

(not actually debating the effort implied in the production of both games here, this is way off-topic already)

 

[The Scrivener]

SNES. I have two SNES minis and a lot of SNES memories. My fav console of all time.

 

[BlackTron]

Do you realize that this is probably why this is the best Super Mario Bros game ever made?

Come on, the best one? SMB2 was an appropriately different/novel sequel to SMB, but how can anything compete with SMB3? In my opinion, 3 is the defining Mario Bros. game and is practically unkillable, even by Super Mario World. Which, to me wasn't really better than 3, it was simply "more good Mario". I actually never fully beat 2 until the GBA version, I've never played it since that time.

I'm one of the people who think the NES library hasn't aged that well, even the games that I really love from playing as a kid, like Ducktales and Mega Man, are hard for me to play today. But I still consider 3 to be the quintessential Mario game that will never get old to me.

SNES has the games that totally captivated me and became defining experiences. This is the system that made me OBSESSED with gaming so much that I didn't pay attention in school and every day was just an endurance test to get home and turn on the system. Super Mario RPG and Yoshi's Island are my favorite games on the system, but SMW and Turtles in Time are in my hall of fame too. Hell, to me SMRPG and Yoshi's Island are so strong that games today have a hard time competing with them, nevermind NES games.

 

[wondermega]

Awesome topic and difficult question. I've gone back and forth over this stuff for years (don't we all?) My hype for SNES was through the roof leading up to it's release, it was the thing that was going to make my (beloved) Sega Genesis look like old tech. And at launch it sure did that, and captivated me for quite some time. But not too many years later, I had a hard time deciding which was really my favorite console ever, and even a few years ago it was still Genesis and NES neck and neck. I think I've got it down to NES at this point as it's the only one whose games I can still just "pick up and play, no fuss no muss" more often than anything else - and still get such a huge blast of nostalgia, even all these years later. Sure, it looks and sounds dated as hell, because it IS, but the cream of the NES crop is exactly all I'll ever want from the majority of gaming for probably the rest of my life! Might sound kind of limiting I suppose, but I guess my brain has permanently baked that way or something.

As for the Mario VS Doki Doki controversy heating up above, I have no issues with the fact that they reskinned a different game to sell to the US market. Sure it broke away from a TON of those early Mario conventions, but at the time I don't think anyone really cared - it was still bouncy, fun, imaginative. In fact it was more refreshing to me than SMB3 come to think of it simply BECAUSE it was so different. Mind you a lot of times in those days, a sequel to something popular might not share much with its predecessor, and though it could be a little frustrating at times, it would often end up being quite welcome because instead of getting "more of the same" we got "some different cool thing." Time hasn't been too kind to Zelda II vs Zelda I for that reason, but again for me I was so excited to have a different way to explore and interact in that particular world, with something building off of the ideas of the first game, rather than just picking it up and tweaking and evolving what was already there. Mario 2 really felt this way too.

 

[Ikutachi]

SNES. I was a big user of the Super Game Boy and Chrono Trigger blew me away. Mario Paint, Super Mario RPG, Yoshi's Island, good stuff. The NES is special to me for Zelda II.

 

[Journey]

Even though you will find a few gems on NES, SNES still holds up today with games like Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy III, Street Fighter 2 Turbo, F-Zero, Legend of Zelda, Super Mario World, Axelay, Castlevania IV, Super Punch-out, Act Raiser, Donkey Kong Country, and that's just off the top of my head.

 

[Trogdor1123]

SNES

Donkey Kong Country Trilogy

Final Fantasy IV

Final Fantasy VI

Super Mario RPG

Chrono Trigger

Mario All Stars

Mario World

Yoshi's Island

Mario Kart

For me this is where video games began to come into something beyond a children's toy.

This post is excellent

 

[wvnative]

This post is excellent

I forgot F Zero and Starfox

 

[Trogdor1123]

I forgot F Zero and Starfox

Just proves how amazing the system is/was!

 

[A.Romero]

To me SNES is superior to NES in every conceivable way. Yes, the NES has pretty good games that set up de foundation for the SNES but the SNES improved on pretty much everything.

I'm not big on retro gaming but If I ever play older games, SNES is the oldest I can stand to go. Older just feels clunky and looks/sounds not so great for more than 5 minutes of playing.

Also some NES games were difficult to understand. At the time I didn't speak English so I had to play pretty much blindly. A lot of NES games were impossible to understand while SNES improved game design and accessibility all around.

 

[cartman414]

Can’t really make a comparison. NES mostly has still very arcadey, simple games, while SNES is the generation where games started becoming longer, more complex and engrossing, but also less immediate, less “pure”.

Like, I love Megaman X1 to bits, but no MM game that came after the NES recaptured the same feeling and gameplay of the original series - with the exception of the phenomenal MM9, and I don’t have to tell you that MM9 is basically a NES game.

Many problems in NES games came from lack of refinement and QoL features, plus the retarded changes to balance and difficulty a lot of games underwent in the transition from Japan to US because of rentals. Games like Metroid and Kid Icarus are significantly better in their original Disk System version thanks to saves - passwords were a chore to write down, and to this day I swear some passwords I did copy correctly didn’t work. Imagine how my heart sank when a password from the second-to-last level in Kid Icarus didn’t work. But apart from these problems, those games are still fun to play. Metroid was a little less brutal in its Japanese version too, I’d love for Nintendo to make those FDS versions available outside Japan at last.

When SNES came along, the widespread adoption of battery saves meant games had to become longer to not be completed over a weekend, but it also meant they got more bloated. And many games were still rooted in 8-bit gameplay anyway. The Super Famicom Dragon Quest games still had all the grinding and the limited saves of their NES precursors, and were mostly much longer and more bloated. FF4 is a NES game on steroids. Basically, all the game genres that were typical of home gaming got undeniably better in the 16-bit era, but also lost something in their evolution. People fawn over Castlevania IV, but I find that game slow and boring compared to CV3 (or even the original, which I never completed without savestates but it’s great to kill half an hour).

On the other hand, purely arcade games really bloomed on SNES. NES ports from arcades simply couldn’t compete with the originals unless the game was specifically repurposed for the home version, like Contra. But space shooters on the SNES are leagues better than almost every single one of their NES counterparts, from Parodius to R-Type to... practically anything you can name. There‘s very few shooters I can play for more than 5 minutes on the NES, but on the 16-bits (and the PC-Engine) I can spend days blasting space monsters into oblivion. And fighting games, well... the NES had Double Dragon, OK, but the SNES had everything, and when one-on-one fighters exploded with SF2, the older hardware had nothing to come back to.

To answer OP’s question, I’ll have to go with SNES because when push comes to shove, there’s little I can replay to completion on the NES in its original state without savestates and such. Everything Megaman and Mario, sure, and Kid Icarus, and a few others. But it’s rare that I go that far into Metroid before ragequitting, and top-down NES RPGs are a chore (but please have a look into sideview action RPGs like Faxanadu or The Battle of Olympus, those are still great games). OTOH, I’ll rarely say no to a quick dive into SNES games when I don’t feel like playing for more than an hour.

NES and SNES IMO were about even on shmups. The SNES slowdown could be a bit of a deal breaker.

Come on, the best one? SMB2 was an appropriately different/novel sequel to SMB, but how can anything compete with SMB3? In my opinion, 3 is the defining Mario Bros. game and is practically unkillable, even by Super Mario World. Which, to me wasn't really better than 3, it was simply "more good Mario". I actually never fully beat 2 until the GBA version, I've never played it since that time.

I'm one of the people who think the NES library hasn't aged that well, even the games that I really love from playing as a kid, like Ducktales and Mega Man, are hard for me to play today. But I still consider 3 to be the quintessential Mario game that will never get old to me.

SNES has the games that totally captivated me and became defining experiences. This is the system that made me OBSESSED with gaming so much that I didn't pay attention in school and every day was just an endurance test to get home and turn on the system. Super Mario RPG and Yoshi's Island are my favorite games on the system, but SMW and Turtles in Time are in my hall of fame too. Hell, to me SMRPG and Yoshi's Island are so strong that games today have a hard time competing with them, nevermind NES games.

Turtles in Time was fun multiplayer but otherwise too easy and mashy.

Awesome topic and difficult question. I've gone back and forth over this stuff for years (don't we all?) My hype for SNES was through the roof leading up to it's release, it was the thing that was going to make my (beloved) Sega Genesis look like old tech. And at launch it sure did that, and captivated me for quite some time. But not too many years later, I had a hard time deciding which was really my favorite console ever, and even a few years ago it was still Genesis and NES neck and neck. I think I've got it down to NES at this point as it's the only one whose games I can still just "pick up and play, no fuss no muss" more often than anything else - and still get such a huge blast of nostalgia, even all these years later. Sure, it looks and sounds dated as hell, because it IS, but the cream of the NES crop is exactly all I'll ever want from the majority of gaming for probably the rest of my life! Might sound kind of limiting I suppose, but I guess my brain has permanently baked that way or something.

As for the Mario VS Doki Doki controversy heating up above, I have no issues with the fact that they reskinned a different game to sell to the US market. Sure it broke away from a TON of those early Mario conventions, but at the time I don't think anyone really cared - it was still bouncy, fun, imaginative. In fact it was more refreshing to me than SMB3 come to think of it simply BECAUSE it was so different. Mind you a lot of times in those days, a sequel to something popular might not share much with its predecessor, and though it could be a little frustrating at times, it would often end up being quite welcome because instead of getting "more of the same" we got "some different cool thing." Time hasn't been too kind to Zelda II vs Zelda I for that reason, but again for me I was so excited to have a different way to explore and interact in that particular world, with something building off of the ideas of the first game, rather than just picking it up and tweaking and evolving what was already there. Mario 2 really felt this way too.

I think time's been kinder to Zelda II for than reason. Zelda I's control feels less fluid and has been upstaged by subsequent top down games, while Zelda II has screamed for a followup.