PCEngineFans.com - The PC Engine and TurboGrafx-16 Community Forum
NEC TG-16/TE/TurboDuo => TG-16/TE/TurboDuo Discussion => Topic started by: it290 on February 02, 2016, 06:22:11 PM
Title: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: it290 on February 02, 2016, 06:22:11 PM
Hi guys,
I've spent a bit of time tonight perusing various hypothetical threads on the forum about NEC's strategy in North America, how they could have opposed the Nintendo/Sega juggernaut, and so on. It got me to thinking: what about NEC vs. SNK?
Now, a bit of backstory: I've loved both of these consoles for a long time. I've had a consolized MVS for quite a while, and a TurboGrafx for quite a while, loved the games on both. Growing up, I was a Sega kid in terms of consoles, but more (most?) of my gaming time at home was spent on the Commodore 64 and Amiga. I played TG-16 games at friends' houses along with other systems I didn't own (like NES and SNES) and the Neo Geo in the arcades. I remember playing games like the Bonk trilogy, Keith Courage, and Silent Debuggers on the turbo and games like Super Baseball 2020, Fatal Fury, and Samurai Shodown II on the MVS. Since then I've played and enjoyed the libraries of each system extensively.
Now, in terms of technical capability, game library, year released, and overall philosophy the two systems are obviously quite different—we're comparing apples and oranges. However, the Turbo/PCE and the Neo Geo share a few things in common: they're both niche systems and underdogs, and their appeal persists to this day because each system has great games that people still enjoy playing.
So, my question is this: which company/system made a greater mark on American gaming culture, and in what way?
I'd note that I'm not speaking only about the US game library, but what a hardcore gamer had access to imports, magazines, and a decent game shop experienced back then. For example, where I lived it was pretty common to find imported games on sale at an average game store, and you could probably special order them and figure out how to play them if you talked to the guy behind the counter, but you didn't know about absolutely everything or probably have interest in games that required extensive Japanese to play.
As for myself, I'm probably partial to SNK—Metal Slug is one of my favorite games of all time and games like KOF'94 lived up to my dreams about fighting games combining characters from many different fighters, and in general I just remember and play the games more, but still the TG-16 just holds this special place in my heart as a system where a lot of creativity flourished, it introduced new things and was (and is) clearly something special unto itself regardless of its commercial success or failure, but if I look at the actual ideas and techniques that each system has produced, I think that I probably see Neo Geo games being emulated and referenced more often than TG-16/PCE ones.
Since I'd imagine that most of you consider both of these consoles to be pretty awesome, I'm curious to hear your opinions about this—which system has a more enduring legacy and why?
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: SignOfZeta on February 02, 2016, 06:59:39 PM
A bigger impact at the time, Neo for sure. Not only is it popular in dozens of countries where no one has ever heard of the PCE, it also basically spilled out over onto almost every system since. Somebody must be buying all these Neo ports because they never stop making them. Even the PCE itself had Neo ports.
Nowadays, with people who actually play a lot of 16-bit games, I'd say the PCE is more important since it made "home" games that captivate for hours instead of minutes. In other worlds, the games on PCE are like the games on FC, MD, etc. The games on Neo are...arcade games, and for some reason "classic" 80s/90s gaming is more associated with consoles in the US, probably because so many Americans live in the middle of nowhere and never go to arcades or much of anywhere.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: lukester on February 03, 2016, 12:31:13 AM
I love neo geo fighters, even though I'm pretty terrible.
Pce is better though. But the neo is much more popular
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: Otaking on February 03, 2016, 12:49:59 AM
So, my question is this: which company/system made a greater mark on American gaming culture, and in what way?
I like these type of versus threads but I can't comment on this one as I'm from the UK so wouldn't fully know about their impacts on "American gaming culture" back in the day.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: Necromancer on February 03, 2016, 02:03:44 AM
Read Zeta's post again for my answer. He nailed it.
The PCE brought the rpg gaming world great voice acting, longer games, and more immersive story lines, but I can't say it made a bigger mark on gamers in general than the Neo's fighting games and other arcade goodness.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: johnnykonami on February 03, 2016, 05:14:11 AM
Definitely the Neo. The Turbo was an underdog. Now we have people just learning of it's greatness but back in the day it was treated like a red headed step child next to the SNES and the Genesis, and it's market penetration in the US was a lot smaller that either of those. The Neo Geo on the other hand, while most couldn't afford to have the home version - was plastered around every arcade and everyone experienced it that way at the very least. I didn't know anyone who owned an AES personally (One friend eventually got a Neo CD) but everybody knew about Samurai Showdown from the arcade regardless of economic status.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: Scillianaire on February 03, 2016, 05:18:42 AM
Pc engine has the better community and is altogether amazing in its own right. But neo geo is a technical powerhouse with over a decade of incredible software. Sure crossed swords is no ys but its very good and very different from what else is out there. Pc engine is better for traditional home games. But neo geo has lots of games that transition very well into that style of play. If you cant sink endless hours into windjammers, magic drop 3, twinkle star sprites, and all those delicious fighters and the beat sports games ever made i dont know what to do with you. Home gaming is just as much about playing with friends as arcade gaming. Both are excellent for multiplayer. Dungeon explore 2 and bomber man coewrly out class neo geo on party gaming but neo geos multiplayer experience is a lot more intimate and involved. considering how many of the big games on both are arcade ports and shmups and neo geo is better at both, you have to give it up to the neo geo.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: Otaking on February 03, 2016, 05:44:56 AM
considering how many of the big games on both are arcade ports and shmups and neo geo is better at both, you have to give it up to the neo geo.
I absolutely adore the Neo Geo and it's shooters, Last Resort and ASO II are amongst my favourite shooters of all time. But there's no way you could suggest the Neo has superior shooters to the PC engine which has titles like Winds/Lords of Thunder, Soldier Blade, Spriggan, Magical Chase etc.. It would be like suggesting the PC Engine is better than the Neo at fighting games, which is just ludicrous.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: Black Tiger on February 03, 2016, 06:15:38 AM
Pc engine has the better community and is altogether amazing in its own right. But neo geo is a technical powerhouse with over a decade of incredible software. Sure crossed swords is no ys but its very good and very different from what else is out there. Pc engine is better for traditional home games. But neo geo has lots of games that transition very well into that style of play. If you cant sink endless hours into windjammers, magic drop 3, twinkle star sprites, and all those delicious fighters and the beat sports games ever made i dont know what to do with you. Home gaming is just as much about playing with friends as arcade gaming. Both are excellent for multiplayer. Dungeon explore 2 and bomber man coewrly out class neo geo on party gaming but neo geos multiplayer experience is a lot more intimate and involved. considering how many of the big games on both are arcade ports and shmups and neo geo is better at both, you have to give it up to the neo geo.
Sounds like you aren't very familiar with either library or history. :/
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: Necromancer on February 03, 2016, 07:27:58 AM
I can't say the NeoGeo has better shewties. They're definitely good looking, but they're generally too damn hard (often cheap quarter munching hard) for my meager skills.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: blueraven on February 03, 2016, 07:47:15 AM
Yeah, Zeta was on point for that one.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: martinine on February 03, 2016, 11:27:40 AM
Necro definitely has the right of it with Neo Geo shooters. Samurai Showdown 2 is almost on par with SFII in my heart. I love them both. The skill required to beat really any Neo fighting games, even on the 2-3 difficulty can be pretty serious. I have a Neo CD, and love the fighters. Wifey gave me View Point for Christmas, and I can say that I'd rather play Blazing Lazers, Soldier Blade, or Gate of Thunder any day.
As far as mark on gaming culture at the time, Neo-Geo was definitely the hard hitter. Even when I went to college in the 2000s, people would often drop their jaw that I had a Neo CD with King of Fighters, Fatal Fury Special, or Samurai Showdown going. Most people made fun of my TG16. Guys would always want to play Neo. No one ever asked me if we could play Turbo but my one other friend who had a Duo.
Needless to say, I still play both pretty regularly, but my Turbo/PCE gets MUCH more PT. Playing Gate of Thunder right now! Love all those stolen Dio riffs.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: SignOfZeta on February 03, 2016, 11:29:17 AM
considering how many of the big games on both are arcade ports and shmups and neo geo is better at both, you have to give it up to the neo geo.
I absolutely adore the Neo Geo and it's shooters, Last Resort and ASO II are amongst my favourite shooters of all time. But there's no way you could suggest the Neo has superior shooters to the PC engine which has titles like Winds/Lords of Thunder, Soldier Blade, Spriggan, Magical Chase etc.. It would be like suggesting the PC Engine is better than the Neo at fighting games, which is just ludicrous.
Pulstar doesn't seem possible on PCE. It might be, not sure why it wouldn't be, but damn it is a next level awesome thing to see run. Same with Last Resort, Blazing Star, Prehistoric Isle 2, and one or two others. At the time time, none of these games are as fun as Gate of Thunder.
I think if the Neo had 6-7 times as many games, like the PCE does, we'd probably have a better variety of shooter. On PCE there were just SO MANY of them over so many years that you end up with a lot of variety and competition. There isn't much competition on Neo, since there were only two or three major developers at any given time.
Btw, the PCE could never do KOF 2003, but the ACD version of Fatal Fury Special is extremely tight. Much closer to Neo than the other two contemporary home systems. For 1994 I would say it was dead nuts even, but the Neo lived another decade and all that experience and all those killer dev tools eventually had Neo looking like a completely different system. Capcom went through three arcade systems in the same time SNK went though one. * Sega went though probably 20.
* The Volvo 240 of game systems, the Neo is a machine so muscular and legit that it outlasted it successor, the Hyper Neo Geo 64 by five years. However...that shit don't count. Nobody liked any of that 3D garbage and it was almost instantly killed.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: Otaking on February 03, 2016, 11:34:34 AM
I can't say the NeoGeo has better shewties. They're definitely good looking, but they're generally too damn hard (often cheap quarter munching hard) for my meager skills.
I didn't mind the hard difficulty of the Neo Geo AES games back in the day, it felt like you were getting more of your moneys worth for the great expense. Back then I would rent games for other systems and for the most part complete them within a few days before returning them to the rental store. Imagine dropping £150 on a Neo game, then completing it in 2 days, would not of been cool.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: SignOfZeta on February 03, 2016, 12:31:23 PM
You never "complete" a Neo game. You can see the credits in 15 minutes but the good ones last a lifetime.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: it290 on February 03, 2016, 02:08:41 PM
So, my question is this: which company/system made a greater mark on American gaming culture, and in what way?
I like these type of versus threads but I can't comment on this one as I'm from the UK so wouldn't fully know about their impacts on "American gaming culture" back in the day.
Well, change that to 'Western gaming culture,' then—I'm definitely interested in hearing a UK perspective on this as well.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: Enternal on February 03, 2016, 02:09:14 PM
Neo Geo physical ports were still being released to last gen's consoles. It definitely had a bigger impact in the US. While there were probably more TG systems in America households then a AES, almost any respectable arcade + more had a MVS.
They both are well respected systems. Outside of the big video game consoles makers (Sony, Microsoft, Xbox, Sony) There were a few other systems that tried to take a piece of the market post the 1983 crash. You have the 7800, Jaguar, CDI, 3DO, Neo Geo AES, Turbografx. And they TG and NG are the only ones that hold respectable name today. Of course there are a lot of casual gamers that have never heard of the systems and even Sega's name is starting to fade in association as a console maker. Nevertheless those that were there and those that go back and look at the consoles that we grew up with will see CDI = Crappy. TG/NG = Solid
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: it290 on February 03, 2016, 02:26:47 PM
Nowadays, with people who actually play a lot of 16-bit games, I'd say the PCE is more important since it made "home" games that captivate for hours instead of minutes.
I'm not sure this is entirely fair—as a generalization, sure, but I've certainly spent hours upon hours improving my skills at Metal Slug or Strikers 1945+, and back in the day certainly spent many hours competing against friends in SS2. Granted, I'm more of an arcade gamer and when it comes to RPGs I prefer the Western ones, but if we're talking about action-oriented titles I think the shooters, fighters, run 'n' guns, beat 'em ups, etc. on the Neo definitely have the ability to hold one's attention as much as those on the TG/PCE, and that's before you get to games like Neo Turf Masters, Baseball Stars 2 or even Magician Lord (flawed as it is). But yeah, when it comes to the more cerebral or story-oriented games the Neo doesn't hold a candle.
I think that when it comes to cultural impact, though, outside of a few key titles like Bomberman (which is almost a genre unto itself, in a way that other iconic games like Bonk could never be), most of the Turbo's relevance comes from the CD system, since it was an incubator for games that were truly cinematic and epic in scope, and nailed a lot of things that its early competitors (Sega CD) got wrong. Before the Turbo CD you had games that coupled strong narrative with good gameplay on computers, but on consoles it set a precedent that continued into the 32-bit era and beyond.
The flipside of this is that the Neo didn't really innovate in many key areas—the most culturally relevant fighter was (and is) Street Fighter II. Run and gun? Contra. Shooter? Probably Space Invaders or Galaga. Yes, Final Fantasy is more iconic than any TG/PCE RPG, but stylistically the PCE evolved that genre a lot, and also popularized Bomberman. You also had the Crash games, which, although niche and not iconic by any means, introduced many gamers to the whole fantasy pinball concept which is still popular.
Off topic—I was (and am) a huge Amiga fan, and have always admired Cinemaware's games excluding their sports titles. If anything that company was a trailblazer of this sort of cinematic, narrative gameplay, and so I feel they were a great match for the TG-CD, but sadly it seems like they felt the need to redo everything on CD with inferior art direction and gameplay... kind of the thing where vision eclipses taste and the final result suffers. If they had released a version of ICFTD that preserved the style of the Amiga original while adding Redbook, voice acting, and improved action segments, I think the game could have been much more impactful and fondly remembered than it is today.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: SignOfZeta on February 03, 2016, 02:28:52 PM
Neo Geo physical ports were still being released to last gen's consoles. It definitely had a bigger impact in the US. While there were probably more TG systems in America households then a AES, almost any respectable arcade + more had a MVS.
They both are well respected systems. Outside of the big video game consoles makers (Sony, Microsoft, Xbox, Sony) There were a few other systems that tried to take a piece of the market post the 1983 crash. You have the 7800, Jaguar, CDI, 3DO, Neo Geo AES, Turbografx. And they TG and NG are the only ones that hold respectable name today. Of course there are a lot of casual gamers that have never heard of the systems and even Sega's name is starting to fade in association as a console maker. Nevertheless those that were there and those that go back and look at the consoles that we grew up with will see CDI = Crappy. TG/NG = Solid
I don't understand why that post seems to completely avoid the only console maker who actually generates real profit nowadays, one that's been in the games biz since 1980 or so...
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: it290 on February 03, 2016, 02:48:50 PM
I can't say the NeoGeo has better shewties. They're definitely good looking, but they're generally too damn hard (often cheap quarter munching hard) for my meager skills.
Yep, the only ones I still play are Strikers 1945+, Blazing Star and Aero Fighters II/III, and Viewpoint to some extent for the nostalgia/atmosphere factor alone. Pulstar is great but I'm not big on R-Type style games, and the rest are just relatively average in my opinion.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: thisIsLoneWolf on February 03, 2016, 03:14:53 PM
If you want to talk about impact, let's not forget that TurboGrafx CD introduced many North American gamers, to the idea of disc based games. An era that we're only now starting to move away from.
The Express showed us what portable games could be, with detailed games on high resolution color screens.
There were a lot of game culture firsts.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: esteban on February 03, 2016, 04:24:29 PM
Sorry, but I have never been a big fan of vs. fighting games (whatever you want to call the genre).
SFII and all the Neo Geo fighters = EVERYTHING THAT WENT WRONG WITH VIDEO GAMES
I am sorry, I know this is an unpopular view, but I would have much rather seen more games in ANY OTHER DAMN GENRE than more shite fighters.
So, for me, the "biggest impact" Neo Geo had is not a positive impact...it is a decidedly negative impact (lifeblood of fighting genre outside of Streetfighter).
I actually adore the non-fighting Neo Geo games, but let me tell you how hard it was to find them in arcades/pizza parlors...
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: SignOfZeta on February 03, 2016, 06:13:01 PM
You think fighters were worse than FPS, MMORPG, Famville and Big Buck f*cker '98?
You're right, that is an unpopular view.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: Enternal on February 03, 2016, 07:01:32 PM
And Nintendo :) sorry I've actually been on medical leave because of a concussion so I'm going to blame it on that.
BTW there are ports of the Samurai Showdown and Metal Slug games on the Wii.
I also feel that's its an awkward comparison to put these two against one another.
I can't remember where it was brought up, but someone made a good point that Neo Geo was allowing ports of their games to be made on other platforms in the 90's. They were targeting a very specific audience and wasn't competing against Nintendo/Sega/NEC. They were all fighting each other during the 16 bit Wars and SNK was off doing its own thing.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: Scillianaire on February 03, 2016, 07:42:31 PM
Maybe im crazy but i actually prefer aero fighters, last resort, striker 1945+, twinkle star sprites, etc to the popular pce shooters. I never cared for sylphia or magical chase. Some of the others are really amazing (cho aniki :dance: ) and if you asked me if i loved pce shmups i would say yes but the quality on the neo geo is without a contemporaneous equal.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: obey my ego on February 03, 2016, 08:41:41 PM
Bigger impact in north america would be the neo geo. But as many have stated. Most games are quarter munchers.
Owned a neo geo mvs, CD, cdz and a pocket color for 5-6 years now. I also have a 150 in 1 chart. So I've played a lot of the titles.
Only owned a TurboGrafx for a short time. Borrowed a friends ever drive and so far the favor the titles on this system. I especially like the fact it has rpgs. Keeps me busy and imersed in the games longer than the neo geo titles can.
The only reason I can see someone favoring the neo geo is for the fighters. Which is the main reason I originally loved the system.
As for shooters both systems have great titles.
If I had to choose one, I'd pick the TurboGrafx. The rpgs and platfotmers are just more my taste.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: esteban on February 04, 2016, 06:25:48 AM
You think fighters were worse than FPS, MMORPG, Famville and Big Buck f*cker '98?
You're right, that is an unpopular view.
:)
When SFII and sports games became the huge mainstream push in the video game industry, I knew that developers would gravitate to the money associated with larger consumer bases.
This was well-before 3D polygon crap ruined things further.
I think I have always been clear about my preferences: they are most certainly rooted in 80's/early 90's arcade/8-bit/16-bit. But even in this period, there were crappy shifts to fighting games, sports games, etc.
I am not an idiot: I know that trends change, that the video game industry evolved, blah, blah, blah.
But the Neo Geo's biggest impact was a negative one, for me.
Had the Metal Slugs and Magician Lords and ____________ had any impact at all, then I could praise the influence Neo Geo had on the genres I adore.
But, suffice it to say, the games I love on the Neo Geo were seen as antiques/artifacts/ghosts of yesteryear...the future for Neo Geo was the red-hot fighting genre.
Here's another shocker that I have openly discussed: RPG's are not a genre I particularly like on consoles. I love ARPGs, truly, but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy an occasional console-RPG (disclaimer: I spent way too much time playing RPGs on the computer in the 80's...I'm also a former pen-n-paper D&D player...so it's the console-incarnation-of-RPG that has never really been a passion of mine....)
So, yeah. Neo Geo was was a bittersweet omen of the shifts in the video game industry.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: johnnykonami on February 04, 2016, 07:57:19 AM
I definitely get where Esteban is going, because for me my first memories of playing Neo Geo games were of Magician Lord and Ninja Combat, basically. If I got lucky I'd see Robo Army or Mutation Nation which I also liked. Usually you'd get a sports games too, Neo Turf Masters I guess but I was too young and dumb to realize I liked golf at the the time. Baseball Stars sometimes also. (I happen to really like Baseball Stars 2, btw - toss up between that and Basewars for my favorite baseball game ever and I don't even really like sports that much.) Sengoku was one of my favorites, I didn't see it that much but I did have a solid couple weeks with it on a camping trip once. At the time it was just so weird and different. I have to say I don't think I ever saw any of the shooters in a MVS growing up at any point, I think because there were so few.
(Neo) Fighting games didn't really catch on for a while in my memory.... like I remember seeing Fatal Fury (the very first one) and maybe Art of Fighting, but only after a while. I don't think anyone really cared about them really until Samurai Shodown came out, and even then I remember SS2 being the big hit. Fatal Fury Special was somewhat popular around the same time also. When KoF 95' came out that definitely had a following, but nobody (at least around me) paid a lick of attention to 94' (before or after.) I think it's here the popularity started to snowball for VS fighters. (And mostly of course from SF2 and Mortal Kombat I'm sure). I am not a huge fan of fighting games, but I have gotten into certain ones for small periods of time - I bought KoF 95' for the Saturn and later on Match of the Millennium for the NGPC, and I liked stuff like Fighter's Megamix as well. But I know damn well after I see all the characters, all the specials, and stages, I'm basically bored of most of them. So they have limited appeal. I definitely appreciate the spritework and artistry involved in the SNK fighters, and I think that is what has really stuck out for me as a lasting impression - they looked damn good. Nothing looked as good at home for a long ass time. If they were arcade only, we wouldn't have been as impressed I don't think as many games looked pretty nice in the arcade (but honestly SNK does deserve special recognition in this area.) but since it was possible to get these games on a home console, the comparisons to the SNES/Genesis/TG16 were inevitable - not to mention driven by magazine advertisements which we were all a little bit subject to since that was the best method of getting game related news pre-internet.
When I look back at the Neo library now I am somewhat disappointed that it has so many fighting games. I tend to like more "adventure" titles whether they be Action RPGs, Dungeon Crawlers, Survival Horror, or Metroid style games, but the Neo had to have games that could be used in an MVS or AES. So at best you got some pure platformers, none of which I remember being super great (Blue's Journey) or those early Alpha Denshi titles, or the rare shooter (none of which I agree stand out above the many great ones in the PCE's library). Still, a fair amount of decent non fighting titles exist. Metal Slug of course needs no introduction and Shock Troopers also comes to mind. And I have a soft spot for those Alpha Denshi (ADK) titles. But you do wonder what could have been done with all that power, to make games meant purely to be played at home. Of course the home system they knew was just a way to play the arcade games at home, the market for AES cartridges wasn't very large since it was beyond the affordability of your average family.
Oh and just for the record, my favorite SNK game is probably Card Fighter's Clash. Plenting of fighting game references, but a collectable card/strategy crossover game got a lot more time out of me than probably the time spent on all of their fighting games combined.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: ginoscope on February 04, 2016, 08:00:39 AM
You think fighters were worse than FPS, MMORPG, Famville and Big Buck f*cker '98?
You're right, that is an unpopular view.
:)
When SFII and sports games became the huge mainstream push in the video game industry, I knew that developers would gravitate to the money associated with larger consumer bases.
This was well-before 3D polygon crap ruined things further.
I think I have always been clear about my preferences: they are most certainly rooted in 80's/early 90's arcade/8-bit/16-bit. But even in this period, there were crappy shifts to fighting games, sports games, etc.
I am not an idiot: I know that trends change, that the video game industry evolved, blah, blah, blah.
But the Neo Geo's biggest impact was a negative one, for me.
Had the Metal Slugs and Magician Lords and ____________ had any impact at all, then I could praise the influence Neo Geo had on the genres I adore.
But, suffice it to say, the games I love on the Neo Geo were seen as antiques/artifacts/ghosts of yesteryear...the future for Neo Geo was the red-hot fighting genre.
Here's another shocker that I have openly discussed: RPG's are not a genre I particularly like on consoles. I love ARPGs, truly, but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy an occasional console-RPG (disclaimer: I spent way too much time playing RPGs on the computer in the 80's...I'm also a former pen-n-paper D&D player...so it's the console-incarnation-of-RPG that has never really been a passion of mine....)
So, yeah. Neo Geo was was a bittersweet omen of the shifts in the video game industry.
I kind of agree with Esteban I always wondered what else could have been done with the Neo Geo hardware besides fighters. I know there were many non fighter games but it still crosses my mind.
Can't say I blame SNK for going the direction they did fighters were perfect for arcades at that time.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: GoldenWheels on February 04, 2016, 08:11:22 AM
I guess I was the only one blown away by The Super Spy? :D Upon seeing the perspective I am fairly sure that at the time I actually uttered the words "it's like you're in the game!!!" #-o
This is kind of an interesting question. Neo seems to have a bit of an unfair advantage IMO....it was an arcade machine and a home console, the Turbo wasn't.
I say that's unfair because at least in my world, I'd have NEVER even known about those SNK games or brand if not for the MVS in the arcade, or maybe because of those ads in the back of EGM. No one I knew owned an AES, for obvious reasons, and it seemed to get no real coverage in mags. So at the time, I'd say the Turbo had the biggest impact, as a home console.
So far as lasting legacy....well, they still put Neo Geo characters in fight games right? Are there any TG specific properties/ips that are still....alive/around?
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: Necromancer on February 04, 2016, 08:27:48 AM
I guess I was the only one blown away by The Super Spy? :D Upon seeing the perspective I am fairly sure that at the time I actually uttered the words "it's like you're in the game!!!" #-o
This is kind of an interesting question. Neo seems to have a bit of an unfair advantage IMO....it was an arcade machine and a home console, the Turbo wasn't.
I say that's unfair because at least in my world, I'd have NEVER even known about those SNK games or brand if not for the MVS in the arcade, or maybe because of those ads in the back of EGM. No one I knew owned an AES, for obvious reasons, and it seemed to get no real coverage in mags. So at the time, I'd say the Turbo had the biggest impact, as a home console.
So far as lasting legacy....well, they still put Neo Geo characters in fight games right? Are there any TG specific properties/ips that are still....alive/around?
I forgot about Super Spy. I was also impressed with that one at the time, I remember a local Royal Farms had it. Good memories of getting some potato wedge fries and playing it are coming back to me now!
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: Otaking on February 04, 2016, 11:07:40 AM
So, my question is this: which company/system made a greater mark on American gaming culture, and in what way?
I like these type of versus threads but I can't comment on this one as I'm from the UK so wouldn't fully know about their impacts on "American gaming culture" back in the day.
Well, change that to 'Western gaming culture,' then—I'm definitely interested in hearing a UK perspective on this as well.
Well here in the UK at the very end of the 80s the PC Engine kicked off the whole "grey import" video games scene, it was really popular. Tons of small one man mail order companies sprung up which mainly sold through adverts in video games magazines. In the beginning it was basically all PC Engine games imported from Japan, practically zero US Turbografx games.
Then by around 1991 we started seeing Neo Geo AES, it was generally talked down in magazines for being ludicrously expensive. I personally ignored the bad reviews as I played the MVS in arcades and knew the games were something special. Initially the Neo Geo AES wasn't popular, I felt people just dismissed it because of the price, but it did develop a very small cult following from hardcore gamers, there was even a "Neo Geo Owners Club".
In the beginning the PC Engine was massively more popular than the Neo but as 1993 rolled round the interest in PCE declined and the tables turned, as Neo was releasing games like Fatal Fury 2 and Samurai Shodown and interest rocketed, we were still gripped in Street Fighter fever and the Neo was delivering next level 2D fighting. I don't think loads of AES consoles or games were sold, it was still too expensive, but the average gamers perception of the AES changed, it was now a highly lauded machine, the "Rolls-Royce of games consoles".
Then by 1994 the PCE completely faded from existence (in the UK), nobody cared about the Arcade card or it's Neo Geo conversions. I personally was really hyped about the Arcade card, breathing new life into my beloved PC Engine.
Then in 1995 the mainstream was all about PlayStation and Ridge Racer. The Neo Geo then developed another cult following which persisted for years to come.
So overall I would say the Neo Geo made the greater mark here in the UK.
Here's a video from the time showing the Neo Geo and the PC Engine, skip to 15.04 in the video.
mentioned before in this thread http://www.pcenginefx.com/forums/index.php?topic=12525.0
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: GoldenWheels on February 04, 2016, 11:21:40 AM
Neo seems to have a bit of an unfair advantage IMO....it was an arcade machine and a home console, the Turbo wasn't.
Uh, yeah it was. It certainly wasn't common, but Turbob arcade cabs did exist.
Fair enough! Was it a like a demo unit for the console or something though? I've just never seen it.
I've seen Cores or PC Engines run into Jamma boards I guess but I assumed those were homemade things.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: SignOfZeta on February 04, 2016, 12:00:40 PM
As someone who, for the most part, HATES sports (the games themselves, the players, the team owners, the stadium owners, Gatorade, Nike, dog fighters, rapists, child beaters, the worse scum in America) I know what it's like to see the entire industry devote itself to something I can't stand. But fighters? They seem so innocent and sincere, the 16-bite era anyway, even the shit ones, and the good ones are typically at the cutting edge of 2D animation.
The reason why the Neo had so so many fighters is because fighter fans loved the system enough to keep it going. Blues Journey doesn't sell and we're taking about a system where just to manufacture the game you need a parts list twice as expensive as a retail Genesis game...and that's before you start coding or drawing anything. You can't make unpopular stuff.
Also, I love Neo sports games, despite hating actual sports. I think if certain people were more open minded they might like a fighter or too...
Title: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: esteban on February 04, 2016, 01:14:20 PM
As someone who, for the most part, HATES sports (the games themselves, the players, the team owners, the stadium owners, Gatorade, Nike, dog fighters, rapists, child beaters, the worse scum in America) I know what it's like to see the entire industry devote itself to something I can't stand. But fighters? They seem so innocent and sincere, the 16-bite era anyway, even the shit ones, and the good ones are typically at the cutting edge of 2D animation.
The reason why the Neo had so so many fighters is because fighter fans loved the system enough to keep it going. Blues Journey doesn't sell and we're taking about a system where just to manufacture the game you need a parts list twice as expensive as a retail Genesis game...and that's before you start coding or drawing anything. You can't make unpopular stuff.
Also, I love Neo sports games, despite hating actual sports. I think if certain people were more open minded they might like a fighter or too...
I hear you. :)
I was speaking in broad strokes: I can appreciate the *concept* of fighters, I have given them them a chance for 20+ years...but they will never be a something that *moves me* (if SFII and the legacy it spawned never existed, say, in an alternate universe, I would not shed a single tear).
I am actually much more willing to give certain sports games some love: golf + baseball, in particular, have worked their way into my heart. I love them. But that soccer (futbol) game in the NeoGeo at my laundromat was cruel, cruel torture. Baseball Stars on NeoGeo is actually not as gratifying as NES Baseball Stars (not kidding....I spent entire summers playing NES Baseball Stars, building up teams and playing tournaments with friends...the fielding in Neo's Baseball Stars is the wrong scale and sacrifices fundamentals for aesthetic "wow" factor...)
TANGENT: Naturally, driving/racing games constitute their own genre. I don't consider them to be part of "sports"...
BACK ON TOPIC: You will punch me, but I have had billion times more fun playing 8Man and Nam '75 and Magician Lord than any fighter.
Sorry.
I am a dinosaur stuck in the past.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: johnnykonami on February 04, 2016, 01:48:34 PM
I was speaking in broad strokes: I can appreciate the *concept* of fighters, I have given them them a chance for 20+ years...but they will never be a something that *moves me* (if SFII and the legacy it spawned never existed, say, in an alternate universe, I would not shed a single tear).
I am actually much more willing to give certain sports games some love: golf + baseball, in particular, have worked their way into my heart. I love them. But that soccer (futbol) game in the NeoGeo at my laundromat was cruel, cruel torture. Baseball Stars on NeoGeo is actually not as gratifying as NES Baseball Stars (not kidding....I spent entire summers playing NES Baseball Stars, building up teams and playing tournaments with friends...the fielding in Neo's Baseball Stars is the wrong scale and sacrifices fundamentals for aesthetic "wow" factor...)
TANGENT: Naturally, driving/racing games constitute their own genre. I don't consider them to be part of "sports"...
BACK ON TOPIC: You will punch me, but I have had billion times more fun playing 8Man and Nam '75 and Magician Lord than any fighter.
Sorry.
I am a dinosaur stuck in the past.
Try Baseball Stars 2! It won't be as deep as NES Baseball Stars but it definitely has a great vibe to it. I also really like Eightman, anything with that 70's-80's anime vibe always catches my attention. When I was a kid I hated Nam '75, and games like it (Cabal springs to mind.) I would probably like it more now if I tried it again. Magician Lord IS the Neo to me. If I ever get a MVS (getting a house finally, could happen!) I will definitely have to track that one down for it. Never had the pleasure of playing through it all the way, just as far as I could get on a handful of quarters.
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: SignOfZeta on February 04, 2016, 03:33:13 PM
What is meant my the "concept" of fighters? I ask because the only reason I like fighters is the execution. The concept...two people beating each others, is totally unappealing. I like seeing a single character with 400 frames of animation, and I like how they were a totally fair, strategically deep way of competing with friends or people you hate or whatever. I like how huge the sprites are, and the way you can come back from certain doom with nothing but huge skill. No genre gives this like 90s fighters do.
And even if you don't care about this, you'd think anyone would love Astra Superstars, which has none of it...
Title: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: esteban on February 04, 2016, 04:10:15 PM
What is meant my the "concept" of fighters? I ask because the only reason I like fighters is the execution. The concept...two people beating each others, is totally unappealing. I like seeing a single character with 400 frames of animation, and I like how they were a totally fair, strategically deep way of competing with friends or people you hate or whatever. I like how huge the sprites are, and the way you can come back from certain doom with nothing but huge skill. No genre gives this like 90s fighters do.
And even if you don't care about this, you'd think anyone would love Astra Superstars, which has none of it...
I understand the concept and the appeal of fighting games, even though I *personally* do not find them as gratifying as NES Golf. It means that I am not unfairly condemning a genre because I have misunderstood its purpose.
Its raison d'être.
I understand why this genre exists, and the strategies/nuances that a good game will provide.
BITD, nearly every friend and family member was obsessed with these games. My brother still is. I have enjoyed many things through him, vicariously, because he is so passionate about the genre... but he scratches his head when I ask him if we could play RC PRO AM instead.
:)
Title: Re: TG-16 / PCE vs. Neo Geo
Post by: geise on February 05, 2016, 12:11:05 PM
SNK was an Arcade developer first and console second. Hell they really weren't a console developer at all. In regards to pce, it was extremely popular in Japan. It gave Sega and Nintendo a huge run for their money over there. I'd say it was just as popular if not more so than the Neo in regards to consoles.