The Master System was a flop in the US, but it was a much bigger success in the UK due to some shenanigans involving the production and licensing of the NES over there. That is why Sega had a better foothold there.
Sorry, but none of this sounds quite right to me. First, the fact the Master System was overall a commercial failure does not mean it was a "stinker". That just sounds like Nintendo fanboy talk. The SNES didn't beat any odds, its success was all but guaranteed following the domination of the NES in the '80s. Nintendo didn't release a new console during the 32-bit era because the N64 got delayed over and over again (the fact it's 64-bit and not 32 is a mere detail, it's part of the same console generation), not because the SNES was good enough to compete with the Saturn or PlayStation. When the 5th console generation started, the 3D craze was in full swing, and the SNES could not seriously do 3D.
The SNES saw commercial success during the 3D era with the DKC series, meaning the delayed launch of the N64 (which was only delayed a year) was more than feasible for Nintendo. As for the Master System not being a “stinker” that is an opinion and my opinion on that console should not be taken as fact. The release of the N64 came just 2 years before that of the Dreamcast, which was the first 6th gen home console. But yes, part of Nintendo’s decision to not release a 32-bit console during the 3D era had more to do with the “bit wars” and marketing than the success of the SNES (especially since pretty much every console released post-N64 was built on a 32-bit architecture)
Well this video could,ve be just called the history of sega and nintendo as you do get somewhat off topic from the snes. But apart from that i hardly could believe that a 32bit generation system wouldn’t have much to offer to nintendo over their snes. Sure donkeykong country 1,2 and 3 and killer instinct were graphically impressive and surely enough 2D games on 32bit systems wouldn’t have per se looked much better but in terms of 3D games those 32bit systems would,ve sooo much to offer over the snes in wich the snes just couldn’t keep up with, not with it’s mode 7 and even not with it’s super fx2 chip because it’s graphics looks nothing compared to 32bit systems. Sure many games on those 32bit systems didn’t look much better then on the snes but that was because they simply underuntelized those system’s capabilities. Well nintendo was at least able to delay the sales of those competitive 32bit systems with their later snes games soo that’s that. Also sega was right that their genesis could do what nintendo couldn’t do because despite not having the fastest instructions in it’s cpu, the genesis cpu still did ran over twice that fast and it did had a 16bit data bus. Also it’s graphics chip weren’t that much underpowered as what nintendo did wanted you to believe with their snes because the snes couldn’t do mode 7,4 backgrounds,high color, high resolution etc… atonce it was one or the other thing. That nintendo did won the 4th gen wars was a bit pure luck because both systems did had good games.
I did go a little off topic there didn’t I? Haha. Maybe I should rework the title to be a little less misleading. And Genesis is actually one of my favorite consoles. I framed the video from the standpoint of “superior” Nintendo as I was focusing more so on Nintendo’s history than Sega’s. And I think “Genesis does what Nintendon’t” was genius marketing; it was cheesy enough and catchy enough to get the point across that the Genesis did was Nintendo couldn’t, bring arcade graphics to a home console (they might have killed their own arcade market in the process but that’s a video for another day)
Little Engine That Could
The Master System was a flop in the US, but it was a much bigger success in the UK due to some shenanigans involving the production and licensing of the NES over there. That is why Sega had a better foothold there.
Sorry, but none of this sounds quite right to me. First, the fact the Master System was overall a commercial failure does not mean it was a "stinker". That just sounds like Nintendo fanboy talk. The SNES didn't beat any odds, its success was all but guaranteed following the domination of the NES in the '80s. Nintendo didn't release a new console during the 32-bit era because the N64 got delayed over and over again (the fact it's 64-bit and not 32 is a mere detail, it's part of the same console generation), not because the SNES was good enough to compete with the Saturn or PlayStation. When the 5th console generation started, the 3D craze was in full swing, and the SNES could not seriously do 3D.
The SNES saw commercial success during the 3D era with the DKC series, meaning the delayed launch of the N64 (which was only delayed a year) was more than feasible for Nintendo. As for the Master System not being a “stinker” that is an opinion and my opinion on that console should not be taken as fact. The release of the N64 came just 2 years before that of the Dreamcast, which was the first 6th gen home console. But yes, part of Nintendo’s decision to not release a 32-bit console during the 3D era had more to do with the “bit wars” and marketing than the success of the SNES (especially since pretty much every console released post-N64 was built on a 32-bit architecture)
Well this video could,ve be just called the history of sega and nintendo as you do get somewhat off topic from the snes.
But apart from that i hardly could believe that a 32bit generation system wouldn’t have much to offer to nintendo over their snes.
Sure donkeykong country 1,2 and 3 and killer instinct were graphically impressive and surely enough 2D games on 32bit systems wouldn’t have per se looked much better but in terms of 3D games those 32bit systems would,ve sooo much to offer over the snes in wich the snes just couldn’t keep up with, not with it’s mode 7 and even not with it’s super fx2 chip because it’s graphics looks nothing compared to 32bit systems.
Sure many games on those 32bit systems didn’t look much better then on the snes but that was because they simply underuntelized those system’s capabilities.
Well nintendo was at least able to delay the sales of those competitive 32bit systems with their later snes games soo that’s that.
Also sega was right that their genesis could do what nintendo couldn’t do because despite not having the fastest instructions in it’s cpu, the genesis cpu still did ran over twice that fast and it did had a 16bit data bus.
Also it’s graphics chip weren’t that much underpowered as what nintendo did wanted you to believe with their snes because the snes couldn’t do mode 7,4 backgrounds,high color, high resolution etc… atonce it was one or the other thing.
That nintendo did won the 4th gen wars was a bit pure luck because both systems did had good games.
I did go a little off topic there didn’t I? Haha. Maybe I should rework the title to be a little less misleading. And Genesis is actually one of my favorite consoles. I framed the video from the standpoint of “superior” Nintendo as I was focusing more so on Nintendo’s history than Sega’s. And I think “Genesis does what Nintendon’t” was genius marketing; it was cheesy enough and catchy enough to get the point across that the Genesis did was Nintendo couldn’t, bring arcade graphics to a home console (they might have killed their own arcade market in the process but that’s a video for another day)