MC68000 @ 7.6 MHz compared to 65c816 @ 3.58MHz

[Anarchist420]

Was the Genesis' CPU absolutely faster than the SNES' CPU? Or did they have trade-offs for console use?

I know that the Super NES was faster overall though, because its GPUs were faster, it had more RAM, the controller response time was faster, and it ran most games at a lower resolution (256x224 usually) than the Genesis (320x224 usually).

 

[magomago]

i thought the snes was slower than the genesis, but it had better graphics (and sound, although very few had a setup worth noticing how nice the snes was for its time) capabilities.
have you ever tried playing MK1 on the genesis and then on the snes? it moves like a snail on the snes...a graphically superior snail
I always figured that is why rpgs were such a staple on the snes; you didn't need super quick reaction times in rpgs, and you could show off beautiful graphics....

 

[mmntech]

Genesis ran older hardware than the SNES. Two years separation, which was a huge tech gap at the time.

I think the SNES had better image quality. Partially because it had a much larger colour palette. The SNES had 512 colours versus 64 for the Genesis.

The Genesis had "Blast Processing", in other words a faster CPU. For the graphics it had, I think it had a faster draw rate and could handle more sprites on screen. Supposedly the Genesis could handle 80 sprites while the SNES was limited to 32. Since the system was mainly designed to play arcade ports, I can see why they went with more sprites versus prettier graphics.

For audio, the SNES was clearly superior. The Genesis was still using FM sound while the SNES used a 16-bit, 32khz DSP. The SNES could also produce 8 sound channels versus 6 on the Genesis. Of course the Genesis was the first console to have CD quality sound with the Sega CD came out, but few had that add-on.

Both systems did support Mode 7 psudo-3D graphics. A few Sega CD games used it. Sonic CD being one notable title.

 

[DivideBYZero]

The 68000 was much faster, the supporting chipset, not so much.

Edit: Also the SNES could handle 128 Sprites and had a 256 colour display.

 

[Ancalagon44]

Here's a good article on what blast processing actually was.

 

[skaertus]

This thread is a little old, but here is my shot, based on what I read in other sources (as I am not an expert in these matters).

The Genesis, released in 1988 in Japan as "Mega Drive", uses a Motorola 68000 at 7.6 MHz, paired with a Zilog Z80 at 3.58 MHz. It was an adaptation of Sega System 16 motherboard, which was released in 1985 and used a 68000 at 10 MHz (as the main CPU) and a Z80 at 4 MHz (as the sound CPU). The Genesis was a step down from the System 16, against 512 on the Genesis), probably to keep the console affordable against the NES.

The 68000 is a 16/32-bit processor released in 1979, and became popular in the 1980s. It was used on both the Macintosh and on the Amiga, and was a competitor to the Intel 8088 processors (which powered the IBM PC) back then. It was also used in many Arcade boards, such as the Capcom Play System and the Neo Geo MVS (which is identical to the Neo Geo AES, the home console).

The Super NES was released in 1990 in Japan as "Super Famicom", and used a Ricoh 5A22 at 3.58 MHz, which is based on the WDC 65C816. I read Nintendo considered using a 68000 at 10 MHz, but turned to the 68C816 to keep costs down and also to keep backwards compatibility with the NES. By using a modified version of the processor, Nintendo was probably able to avoid some payment of royalties (as it did with the NES).

The 65C816 is an 8/16-bit processor released in 1983. It could have been used in computers such as the Macintosh or the Lisa, but it was not ready back then. Apart from the SNES, the 68C816 was used in the Apple IIgs.

By just looking at the numbers, it may seem that the Genesis had a much faster processor than the SNES. After all, it had a 16/32-bit processor at 7.6 MHz, against an 8/16-bit processor at 3.58 MHz. Well, not necessarily so. The 65C816 derived from the MOS 6502, which was known for its low clock speeds delivering similar performance to other processor designs using much faster clocks (as it required less clock cycles for the most instructions). The NES used a Ricoh 2A03, a modified version of the 6502, at 1.79 MHz. So, the SNES was significantly (at least twice) faster than the NES, but it was also in the same league as the Genesis.

Steve Wozniak (one of Apple founders, together with Steve Jobs) gave an interview in 1984 in which he praised the 68C816 for being twice as fast as a 68000 (an 8 MHz 65C816 would be equivalent to a 16 MHz 68000, which did not exist at the time). So, based on these assumptions, the SNES processor would be as fast as a 7.16 MHz 68000, which is in the same ballpark of the 7.6 MHz 68000 used in the Genesis. Based on the information on this website (https://segaretro.org/Sega_Mega_Drive/Hardware_comparison#Vs._SNES), the Genesis processor is slightly faster than the SNES processor for most operations.

The SNES experiences some significant slowdowns compared to the Genesis, but they were generally attributed to other factors other than the CPU. These factors included bus width (8-bit in the SNES and 16-bit in the Genesis), slower ROM speeds in some cartridges, and the DMA unit inside the VDP graphics processor (and which was called the "blast processing").

The SNES had clearly some other advantages, such as in the graphics and sound departments, and in the possibility of using additional chips. However, I wonder whether the 65C816 was a poor choice for the CPU. The SNES was released about two years after the Genesis, and the launch price was $10 higher. The 68000 was probably cheap enough to be used in the SNES by the end of 1990, and a 10MHz chip could have assured not only faster speeds but also better compatibility with Arcade boards for porting games more easily. And Nintendo decided to drop NES backward compatibility anyway.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I know that the SegaCD games really kicked some butt, though. Final Fight CD for SegaCD was pixel-perfect, it seemed, with better CD music than the original arcade edition.

 

[skaertus]

I know that the SegaCD games really kicked some butt, though. Final Fight CD for SegaCD was pixel-perfect, it seemed, with better CD music than the original arcade edition.

Sega CD had its own 68000 at 12.5 MHz, so games benefitted from the extra speed. In addition, a CD could hold about 650 Megabytes, while Genesis/SNES games were usually limited to 4 Megabytes (32 Megabits) ROM cartridges, with a few exceptions which held more data, but did not come close to the capacity of a CD.

Final Fight was originally released for the Arcade in a Capcom Play System motherboard (CPS-1) in 1989. The CPS-1 ran a 10 MHz 68000 processor coupled with a 3.58 MHz Z80; Capcom seems to have been inspired by Sega System 16 configuration. The CPS-1 was more powerful than the System 16, as it had better graphic capabilities, even though they used the same processor. The Sega CD, being an add-on to the Genesis, had a faster processor, but suffered from some of the same limitations in displaying graphics. These limitations, however, did not affect the Final Fight port.

Final Fight was released in 1990 for the SNES, as one of the launch titles, in a 1 Megabyte (8 Megabits) cartridge. Capcom did a good job in porting the Arcade game, which was approximately 3.5 Megabytes in size. The games are graphically similar, as it can be seen in this video (

). While the SNES probably had enough power for a much better conversion (as even later Final Fight games would show), it was seriously limited by the 1 Megabyte ROM cart. So, some content had to be excluded (such as the possibility of not being able to choose Guy as a playable character). Also, Capcom chose to limit the game to 1-player mode, and the reason for this is unclear to me.

Final Fight CD came out in 1993. In addition to having a processor more similar to the CPS-1 (and even faster), the Sega CD benefitted from not being limited to the small size of ROM carts. So, Final Fight CD allowed for content that even the Arcade game could not deliver (such as better music and sound). Final Fight CD is better than Final Fight for SNES (

), especially due to the possibility of 2-player game and also being able to choose Guy. Note that Final Fight CD also came out much later than the SNES version. However, it the Sega CD version is still not pixel-perfect, as the Arcade game is slightly superior (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FYiDC177FZI).

 

[Stuka87]

Wow, super old thread!

I own (and have since the 90's) a Genesis, with Sega CD, with 32X. The Genesis itself was most definitely inferior to the SNES. The SNES had several co-processors to handle various things. Including the available FX chip, which was onboard a game cartridge.

The FX chip made a massive difference in audio. For example, I own Doom for SNES and for 32X. The 32X version looks massively better than the SNES version. But the SNES version SOUNDS massively better than the 32X. The music just does not sound good on the 32X version, it was kind of a let down because the music is such a big part of Doom.

 

[UsandThem]

Man reading this thread brought back the memories of the commercials that ran at that time:

 

[NTMBK]

Wow, super old thread!

I own (and have since the 90's) a Genesis, with Sega CD, with 32X. The Genesis itself was most definitely inferior to the SNES. The SNES had several co-processors to handle various things. Including the available FX chip, which was onboard a game cartridge.

The FX chip made a massive difference in audio. For example, I own Doom for SNES and for 32X. The 32X version looks massively better than the SNES version. But the SNES version SOUNDS massively better than the 32X. The music just does not sound good on the 32X version, it was kind of a let down because the music is such a big part of Doom.

Mega Drive did have the Virtua Processor, which was similar to the FX. It made Virtua Racing on a console possible, which was pretty impressive:

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1XYImkDUfls/VPs-yOO3PmI/AAAAAAAAAfs/r8s-pDNA2SA/s1600/virtua-racing-usa.png

There was a plan to make the Virtua Processor into an add-on, rather than building it into the cartridge, to make the games that used it cheaper, but it got cancelled. Probably for the best- the Mega Drive already had enough add ons...

 

[Stuka87]

Mega Drive did have the Virtua Processor, which was similar to the FX. It made Virtua Racing on a console possible, which was pretty impressive:

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1XYImkDUfls/VPs-yOO3PmI/AAAAAAAAAfs/r8s-pDNA2SA/s1600/virtua-racing-usa.png

There was a plan to make the Virtua Processor into an add-on, rather than building it into the cartridge, to make the games that used it cheaper, but it got cancelled. Probably for the best- the Mega Drive already had enough add ons...

Yeah, my Sega Genesis/CD/32X when assembled is gigantic!

And Virtua Racing was really impressive for the time, but very few games used that on the Sega side of things. Where as on the SNES side it was used by many games.

When the N64 came into being, the same idea was changed into an add-on module. Which I had in mine. A handful of games made use of it by increasing the resolution and detail. Was almost along the lines of PS4 vs PS4 Pro. A game will run on both, but one gets better visuals for games that support it.

 

[skaertus]

Wow, super old thread!

I own (and have since the 90's) a Genesis, with Sega CD, with 32X. The Genesis itself was most definitely inferior to the SNES. The SNES had several co-processors to handle various things. Including the available FX chip, which was onboard a game cartridge.

The FX chip made a massive difference in audio. For example, I own Doom for SNES and for 32X. The 32X version looks massively better than the SNES version. But the SNES version SOUNDS massively better than the 32X. The music just does not sound good on the 32X version, it was kind of a let down because the music is such a big part of Doom.

The SNES co-processors were something, and the add-on chips indeed made up for some of its shortcuts. Unfortunately, the add-on chips were used in few games only. I only played Doom for PC, so I cannot tell how good it was on the SNES or the 32X or any other platform. I guess the PC version is still the best one, though (provided you had enough specs to run it at the time).

 

[skaertus]

Man reading this thread brought back the memories of the commercials that ran at that time:

Sega had some pretty aggressive commercials back then. Remembers me of the early 90s. I noticed, however, that Sega avoids putting SNES and Genesis games side-by-side. Perhaps it was because the superior color palette of the SNES might be more impressive than the superior speed of the Genesis.

 

[skaertus]

Mega Drive did have the Virtua Processor, which was similar to the FX. It made Virtua Racing on a console possible, which was pretty impressive:

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1XYImkDUfls/VPs-yOO3PmI/AAAAAAAAAfs/r8s-pDNA2SA/s1600/virtua-racing-usa.png

There was a plan to make the Virtua Processor into an add-on, rather than building it into the cartridge, to make the games that used it cheaper, but it got cancelled. Probably for the best- the Mega Drive already had enough add ons...

The Sega SVP was clearly a superior chip to the Super FX (and also the Super FX 2). Virtua Racing for the Genesis was very nice, and more impressive than Stunt Race FX, which was released for the SNES the same year.

The problem, however, is that the SVP, being so powerful, was very expensive. Virtua Racing sold for some $100, which was kind of unreasonable at the time, and I suppose it was not exactly a commercial success. As a result, Virtua Racing was the only game using the SVP. The thing is, both Sega and Nintendo could have put any chip on their cartridges to improve or enhance their consoles. A powerful chip, however, would significantly increase the costs. The Super FX, not being as powerful, was affordable enough to be included in a number of games (including the wildly successful Star Fox, released one year and a half before Virtua Racing), which made it commercially feasible.

The SVP was part of several bad decisions taken by Sega back then. I think Sega may have somewhat obsessed in offering powerful solutions to increase the Genesis capabilities which ended up backfiring. This seems to be the case of the Sega CD and the 32X, but also the SVP. It sounds great that Sega was committed to offering their customers the best possible experience. The bad thing, though, is that customers never actually bought these devices in enough numbers to make them as successful as the Genesis, and they turned out to be failures that did not catch the attention of developers. To be fair, Nintendo also made a very bad decision back then, which was breaking their partnership with Sony for the production of the SNES CD-ROM. I suppose these companies had terrible governance at the time.

 

[Stuka87]

The SVP was part of several bad decisions taken by Sega back then. I think Sega may have somewhat obsessed in offering powerful solutions to increase the Genesis capabilities which ended up backfiring. This seems to be the case of the Sega CD and the 32X, but also the SVP. It sounds great that Sega was committed to offering their customers the best possible experience. The bad thing, though, is that customers never actually bought these devices in enough numbers to make them as successful as the Genesis, and they turned out to be failures that did not catch the attention of developers. To be fair, Nintendo also made a very bad decision back then, which was breaking their partnership with Sony for the production of the SNES CD-ROM. I suppose these companies had terrible governance at the time.

I think Sega coming up with add-ons for the Genesis was a big mistake. The add-ons were super expensive, and it fragmented their user base. If you think about it, Nintendo had the SNES and the N64 in the 90's. Sega had the Genesis (technically 89 in NA, but mostly marketed in the 90's), the SegaCD, the 32X, the Saturn, the Dreamcast. Not only did it fragment the user base from what consoles they had, it also fragmented the developers for which console they wanted to make a game for.

And I kind of feel Nintendo ended up in a better place by not coming out with an SNES CD. Sony did get a big market foothold by getting out before the N64, but the N64 was also significantly superior from a hardware perspective.

 

[NTMBK]

And I kind of feel Nintendo ended up in a better place by not coming out with an SNES CD. Sony did get a big market foothold by getting out before the N64, but the N64 was also significantly superior from a hardware perspective.

The N64 may have had a faster CPU and a more advanced graphics chip, but it also made some really bad choices. It didn't have a dedicated sound cup. Everything was a bit of a blurry mess, due to tiny texture cache and system level blur filter. Games just didn't fit in as much stuff- no CD quality soundtrack, no FMV cutscene, no sprawling 50+ hour RPG epic. And cartridges were way more expensive, meaning you couldn't get mid-priced experimental games, or budget rereleases.

Don't get me wrong- I grew up with an N64, and still love it. But I think Sony made the better technological trade-offs.

 

[Stuka87]

The N64 may have had a faster CPU and a more advanced graphics chip, but it also made some really bad choices. It didn't have a dedicated sound cup. Everything was a bit of a blurry mess, due to tiny texture cache and system level blur filter. Games just didn't fit in as much stuff- no CD quality soundtrack, no FMV cutscene, no sprawling 50+ hour RPG epic. And cartridges were way more expensive, meaning you couldn't get mid-priced experimental games, or budget rereleases.

Don't get me wrong- I grew up with an N64, and still love it. But I think Sony made the better technological trade-offs.

The lack of a sound chip was the biggest technical downfall of the N64 IMO. They fixed the memory issue down the road with the add-on module, but only a handful of games used it.

jRPG's definitely swarmed to the PlayStation rather than the N64 thanks to there being lots of space. An interesting thing regarding music though is smaller games had CD quality sound by having the audio tracks burned onto the disc. Larger games, often still used compressed music files. Although the CPU did not have to deal with playing the music.

 

[skaertus]

I think Sega coming up with add-ons for the Genesis was a big mistake. The add-ons were super expensive, and it fragmented their user base. If you think about it, Nintendo had the SNES and the N64 in the 90's. Sega had the Genesis (technically 89 in NA, but mostly marketed in the 90's), the SegaCD, the 32X, the Saturn, the Dreamcast. Not only did it fragment the user base from what consoles they had, it also fragmented the developers for which console they wanted to make a game for.

And I kind of feel Nintendo ended up in a better place by not coming out with an SNES CD. Sony did get a big market foothold by getting out before the N64, but the N64 was also significantly superior from a hardware perspective.

I agree with you that the add-ons to the Genesis were a mistake.

The Sega CD was released in December 1991 in Japan (as the Mega CD), followed by an October 1992 launch in the U.S. The device was expensive, and users had to pay an additional $299 on top what whatever they had disbursed to buy a Genesis. Plus, being an add-on, the market for a Sega CD was restricted to people who already owned a Genesis.

Although the Sega CD had a more powerful processor (a 68000 at 12.5 MHz), it was bottlenecked by the single-speed CD unit and by the RAM (6 Mbit). Back in 1991, even the single-speed drive and that amount of RAM were impressive for a console, but they did not provide an optimal gaming experience (especially since gamers were used to speedy ROM carts).

On top of this, back in 1991, few games made use of CDs, which were largely underused as media storage. The Sega CD, being expensive, limited to Genesis users, and with those bottlenecks, would not sell in large numbers to push developers to make more CD-based games specifically for the device. Developers would still prefer to make 16-bit ROM games at the time, which they could port to Genesis and Super NES, which, together, corresponded to a market multiple times larger than the Sega CD alone.

The Sega CD went on to sell more than 2 million units, which is good for an expensive add-on to a console. However, this number was largely insufficient to create a new gaming platform, and the Sega CD sunk with just a few good games.

Sega did not learn the lesson, and the 32X was an even greater failure. I am surprised that the 32X sold 800,000 units, given that it was exactly cheap ($159.99 at launch), and it was mostly seen as a watered-down Saturn. I wonder what was Sega's strategy to release two 32-bit consoles so near each other, one with ROM carts and the other with CD-ROMs (which means that games would not be as easily ported from one to the other, as CDs have far more storage).

It is even more impressive that six of the games released required both a Sega CD and a 32X. How many copies the developers were expecting to sell, considering that potential customers would have to own a Genesis, a Sega CD and a 32X in advance of considering buying the game?

I can understand Sega wanted to extend the Genesis lifespan. After all, the Genesis was, during some time, the second most popular console (after only the NES, and before going neck-to-neck with the SNES). Genesis was the biggest, and perhaps only, Sega success. The Master System was a successful console, with some 18 million units sold, but sales were far higher in Europe and Brazil; the Saturn and the Dreamcast did not sell in enough numbers to justify themselves. The Genesis was the only one to make it to the mainstream. But the add-ons were a mistake.

As for Nintendo, I think the decision to skip the SNES CD was the biggest mistake in its history.

First, because it allowed Sony to take over the SNES CD project and launch the Playstation a few years later. Sony would have never entered the gaming market if Nintendo had not dropped the SNES CD. Sony was a huge company that had the resources to take the market from the then all-powerful Nintendo. And, as it turned out, Sony became the big one, and Nintendo a distant second.

Second, because Nintendo alienated the developers. Nintendo stuck with ROM carts, mainly due to piracy concerns (this being one of the main reasons why the SNES CD project was dropped). ROM carts held much less storage than CD-ROMs, and were more expensive. Plus, the shortcomings of CD-ROMs were much superseded at the time, with 4x drives and more RAM. And, most important of all, developers were focused on making games for CD-ROMs, with full-motion video, and using a lot of storage. CD-ROM games could be made or ported to PC, Mac, 3DO, Playstation, Saturn, CD-i, and so many other platforms being released or becoming popular after 1993. Nintendo was late to the game in 1996, and decided to use a media nobody else was using. Why someone would make polygonal ROM games for the powerful but new Nintendo 64, when they could make FMV CD games that would run on different already popular platforms?

 

[Stuka87]

Second, because Nintendo alienated the developers. Nintendo stuck with ROM carts, mainly due to piracy concerns (this being one of the main reasons why the SNES CD project was dropped). ROM carts held much less storage than CD-ROMs, and were more expensive. Plus, the shortcomings of CD-ROMs were much superseded at the time, with 4x drives and more RAM. And, most important of all, developers were focused on making games for CD-ROMs, with full-motion video, and using a lot of storage. CD-ROM games could be made or ported to PC, Mac, 3DO, Playstation, Saturn, CD-i, and so many other platforms being released or becoming popular after 1993. Nintendo was late to the game in 1996, and decided to use a media nobody else was using. Why someone would make polygonal ROM games for the powerful but new Nintendo 64, when they could make FMV CD games that would run on different already popular platforms?

Here in the US the Playstation launched on September 9, 1995. The N64 on September 26, 1996. (both were launched earlier in japan). So the N64 wasn't THAT late.

FMV thankfully turned out to be a fad that died. I don't think anybody would claim that FMV games were an amazing experience (I own and played many of them). And yes, it did allow video cut scenes to be used, but all these really did was allow the developer to false advertise a game. Pretty much every game that had pre-rendered cut scenes used those in the commercial, and rarely showed actual game play. It allowed them to push HORRIBLE games because people thought they looked great in the commercial.

But to be clear, porting games between other consoles was not made easy because they were all CD based. They all had different architectures and required work from the developer. A CD doesn't let a game suddenly run on x86, PPC, ARM, Custom, etc.

It would have been interesting to see what happened if Nintendo kept the SNES CD, but it would have been a short lived console as the Ultra 64 (what the N64 was originally called) was already in development.

 

[skaertus]

Here in the US the Playstation launched on September 9, 1995. The N64 on September 26, 1996. (both were launched earlier in japan). So the N64 wasn't THAT late.

FMV thankfully turned out to be a fad that died. I don't think anybody would claim that FMV games were an amazing experience (I own and played many of them). And yes, it did allow video cut scenes to be used, but all these really did was allow the developer to false advertise a game. Pretty much every game that had pre-rendered cut scenes used those in the commercial, and rarely showed actual game play. It allowed them to push HORRIBLE games because people thought they looked great in the commercial.

But to be clear, porting games between other consoles was not made easy because they were all CD based. They all had different architectures and required work from the developer. A CD doesn't let a game suddenly run on x86, PPC, ARM, Custom, etc.

It would have been interesting to see what happened if Nintendo kept the SNES CD, but it would have been a short lived console as the Ultra 64 (what the N64 was originally called) was already in development.

Well, the Playstation launched in Japan on December 3, 1994, and the N64 on June 23, 1996. So, while they were about a year apart in the U.S., they were separated by one year and a half in the Japan. The Sega Saturn was released even earlier, on November 22, 1994, in Japan, and on July 8, 1995, in the U.S. CD-ROMs became very popular on PCs as part of multimedia kits circa 1993-94. So, at the time the N64 had launched, CD-ROMs were already the most popular media storage in the world; and were soon to become obsolete, as the DVD was first released in late 1996.

I agree that porting games is not that easy. And it might have been easier to port a game from the PS1 to the N64 and vice-versa, as they both used MIPS architecture. And the Sega Saturn was considered difficult for programmers to handle. But, at least, developers did not have to build the game from scratch. I mean, a 500 MB game for PC could be ported to the PS1 or to the Saturn, at least, but it would not fit into a N64 cart, which could hold a maximum of 64 MB.

As far as I know, it was never Nintendo's intention to have both the SNES CD-ROM and the N64. Nintendo and Sony failed to reach an agreement to produce the SNES CD-ROM on negotiations that began to fall apart in 1992. In 1993, Nintendo decided to drop the SNES CD-ROM project (which was probably already delayed due to these failed attempts to negotiate), and focused on a partnership with Silicon Graphics for a new generation of consoles. Should the SNES CD-ROM be launched as initially expected (perhaps 1992-93), it would not compete with the N64 (which may have well never existed).

As for FMV, they did not provide a great experience. But they were a novelty back in 1994, and "interactive movies", as they were called back then, were very popular. The 7th Guest sold some 2 million copies after being released in 1993, and was a major force behind CD-ROMs popularity. Phantasmagoria, Roberta Williams' extravaganza, cost a then whopping $4.5 million, and became Sierra's first game to sell over a million copies when it was released in 1995. As impressive those games were, they provided a sub-optimal experience, but that did not prevent them from being popular.

 

[Stuka87]

As for FMV, they did not provide a great experience. But they were a novelty back in 1994, and "interactive movies", as they were called back then, were very popular. The 7th Guest sold some 2 million copies after being released in 1993, and was a major force behind CD-ROMs popularity. Phantasmagoria, Roberta Williams' extravaganza, cost a then whopping $4.5 million, and became Sierra's first game to sell over a million copies when it was released in 1995. As impressive those games were, they provided a sub-optimal experience, but that did not prevent them from being popular.

Yeah, I had 7th Guest for CDi, which required an add-on module to even play it. But, I stand by it being one of the very best versions of the game. The PC/Mac version was really not nearly as good (Visually)

Another big type of game that drove CD sales were games like Myst, Jouneyman project, and other exploration puzzle games.

 

[skaertus]

Yeah, I had 7th Guest for CDi, which required an add-on module to even play it. But, I stand by it being one of the very best versions of the game. The PC/Mac version was really not nearly as good (Visually)

Another big type of game that drove CD sales were games like Myst, Jouneyman project, and other exploration puzzle games.

Wow, you are probably the first person I know that actually had a CD-i. Was it any good?

And there were those games as well. Myst was quite the thing back then, some 6 million copies sold.

And then there was Rebel Assault, Return to Zork, Full Throttle, Quake, Diablo, and other games which could only be stored in a CD-ROM, and did not require all the processing power of the Nintendo 64. To be fair, it was probably Nintendo's greed, not only to over-protect its consoles against piracy, but also to squeeze game developers, which made many of them flock to Sony when it brought a real alternative.

 

[Stuka87]

Wow, you are probably the first person I know that actually had a CD-i. Was it any good?

And there were those games as well. Myst was quite the thing back then, some 6 million copies sold.

And then there was Rebel Assault, Return to Zork, Full Throttle, Quake, Diablo, and other games which could only be stored in a CD-ROM, and did not require all the processing power of the Nintendo 64. To be fair, it was probably Nintendo's greed, not only to over-protect its consoles against piracy, but also to squeeze game developers, which made many of them flock to Sony when it brought a real alternative.

The CDi was... interesting. The base controller was like a Wii remote almost, without the motion controls. Which for 7th Guest, was great. Kick back on the couch, and play the whole thing with just one hand. We had the wireless one, which was IR based, but it functioned fine. The gamepad was a bit meh.

From a hardware perspective it was pretty impressive, but it really lacked games. Even finding games was hard.

Quake and Quake II were both available for the N64. I recall playing both of them. But being that I normally played on Expert CTF servers on the desktop, going to console controls felt like playing underwater. It looked fine for the time, did not play great. Quake played about the same on the PlayStation, it just looked a lot worse.

 

[skaertus]

The CDi was... interesting. The base controller was like a Wii remote almost, without the motion controls. Which for 7th Guest, was great. Kick back on the couch, and play the whole thing with just one hand. We had the wireless one, which was IR based, but it functioned fine. The gamepad was a bit meh.

From a hardware perspective it was pretty impressive, but it really lacked games. Even finding games was hard.

Quake and Quake II were both available for the N64. I recall playing both of them. But being that I normally played on Expert CTF servers on the desktop, going to console controls felt like playing underwater. It looked fine for the time, did not play great. Quake played about the same on the PlayStation, it just looked a lot worse.

Yes, I suppose the CD-i lacked games.

Yes, you are right, Quake and Quake II were both available for the N64. I never played any of them, though.