Graphics: Turbo vs. Genesis - ye old debate

[handygrafx]

...the parallax is there in the 2nd level and where ever the arcade had it. with that said,  it's not that the PCE/TG16 couldn't handle that parallax, since of course we all know the machine can be forced to do it. 

Not to defend lazy programmers or anything, but the types of parallax in stage 2 and 5 of R-Type are different, and the type of parallax on stage 5 has been pointed out again and again to be a simple hsync scroll, without some people here "getting it" that it's not the same as true parallax.  It'd be tough to "force" the PCE to do true parallax with two different layers of graphics such as the ones on stage 2, but I guess the easiest way to do it would be VRAM animation, which (since the blue BG seems to tile at 32 or 64 pixels) would eat up a lot of VRAM.  Or just ROM, if the programmers were good enough to manage VRAM animation from ROM (rather than a VRAM-to-VRAM copy.)

there are exceptions to this rule though. the Amiga. it didn't have any hardware scrolling background layers, yet in games like Shadow of the Beast and Lionheart programmers achived many (more than 3-4) layers.

ref:
http://hol.abime.net/1891/screenshot
http://hol.abime.net/894/screenshot

The Amiga (ECS chipset) can indeed have two completely independent background layers.  The games Menace and Agony (and I'm sure countless others) use it to create the appearance of several backgrounds, layered on top of each other.  I just looked again at the screenshots of Shadow of the Beast, and that's the mode that I believe the game is running in most of the time.  Probably Lionheart too.

The main limitation to the dual-BG mode of the Amiga is that each background can have only 3 bitplanes (8 colours per BG), while the regular single BG mode of the Amiga can have 6 bitplanes (32 colours +halfbrite if needed).

ah, thanks for correcting me on the details of parallax scrolling.   obviously I don't have much knowledge on the subject.    Also about the capabilities of the Amiga chipset.

[awack]

We shouldn't think that the standard 16 bit genesis can do the exact same graphics that are in knuckles and chatotix though since the only 3 screenshots Ive seen of it range from 80 to 90 colors which is higher than any ingame genesis screenshot that i have seen, having said that, there are regular genesis games that look just as good to me

[handygrafx]

if only the Genesis had the color capabilities of Sega's System 16 arcade hardware.  Close to 2000 colors (or at least 1500) on screen out of 32,768.   not as much as NEO-GEO but more than PC-Engine, and more colors on-screen than SNES.   

I just love the colors & shading of System 16 games

/alteredbeastsystem16mb1.png

Yeah, I know the PC-Engine was able to reproduce the colors/shading of System 16 games better than Sega's own console.


 Actually, I wanted the Genesis to have all the capabilities of the System 16B, including scaling. 

While not as powerful as Sega's various high-end, multi-68000 boards with Super-Scaler technology, the System 16B as a midrange powered board from the mid 1980s was really nice. It concievably could have been used as the basis for Genesis.   I could be wrong but I think a common misconception is that the Genesis was based on System 16.  I don't think it was, other than having *some* of the same basic capabilities (16-bit 68000 CPU, two background layers).  I suppose a Genesis based directly off of System 16  would've cost too much -- On the other hand, maybe not, given the 2-3 year timeframe Sega would have had to shrink a midrange board from mid-80s into a console for '88/'89.

[Keranu]

Now here's a fun poll:

What do you think would've benefitted more? The Turbo Grafx 16 having an extra background layer or the Genesis having palette capabilities as the TG16  ? We sorta already have a TG16 with an extra background layer thanks to the Super Grafx, but I'd like to hear comments regarding this .

[Turbo D]

I'd say that sega and nec should get together and release a next gen console 

[PCEngineHell]

I'd say that sega and nec should get together and release a next gen console 

They did,it was called the Dreamcast.

[Joe Redifer]

Impressive! That's really interesting that the Genesis does the backgrounds, is there a reason for that?

Yes.  That's just how the 32X worked.  It genlocked its video over or under (or both) onto the Genesis video.  The video output from the Genesis actually goes into the 32X, and then the video out jack on the 32X went to the TV.  Since the video was transmitted via RGB from the Genesis, composite video with a 32X playing a regular Genesis game looks much better than composite video from the Genesis itself.  No more vertical rainbow stripes.  Less fuzziness.  Much better.  In short, just having a 32X attached and hooked up properly fixes all of the Genesis' composite video shortcomings.

Anyway, for Knuckles' Chaotix, the 32X just drew the sprites and the polygonal parts of the bonus stages.  The Genesis used its own colors for all of the backgrounds.  Unfortunately the 32X cannot give the Genesis extra colors to use for its layers.  In Kolibri the 32X does the sprites as well as a background layer and the Genesis does the furthest background layers with sprite tricks to simulate 3 BGs in addition to the 32X BG for a total of 4 BGs in the first stage.  In Space Harrier, the 32X does EVERYTHING except the background... but even the background has super smooth color gradients that are done by the 32X.  That's a great example of 32X putting stuff in front of and behind Genesis graphics simultaneously.

[Turbo D]

I'd say that sega and nec should get together and release a next gen console 

They did,it was called the Dreamcast.

I didn't know that nec had anything to do with the dreamcast 

[Joe Redifer]

Yeah.  They did the grafx.  Seriously.

[Turbo D]

  wow, I have a new respect for my dreamcast.

[Keranu]

Yes.  That's just how the 32X worked.  It genlocked its video over or under (or both) onto the Genesis video.  The video output from the Genesis actually goes into the 32X, and then the video out jack on the 32X went to the TV.  Since the video was transmitted via RGB from the Genesis, composite video with a 32X playing a regular Genesis game looks much better than composite video from the Genesis itself.  No more vertical rainbow stripes.  Less fuzziness.  Much better.  In short, just having a 32X attached and hooked up properly fixes all of the Genesis' composite video shortcomings.

Anyway, for Knuckles' Chaotix, the 32X just drew the sprites and the polygonal parts of the bonus stages.  The Genesis used its own colors for all of the backgrounds.  Unfortunately the 32X cannot give the Genesis extra colors to use for its layers.  In Kolibri the 32X does the sprites as well as a background layer and the Genesis does the furthest background layers with sprite tricks to simulate 3 BGs in addition to the 32X BG for a total of 4 BGs in the first stage.  In Space Harrier, the 32X does EVERYTHING except the background... but even the background has super smooth color gradients that are done by the 32X.  That's a great example of 32X putting stuff in front of and behind Genesis graphics simultaneously.

Wow I never knew that, that's pretty amazing. I really need to get a 32X! I'm still curious though, does the 32X have any of it's own background layers? I don't get how Kolibri worked if the 32x didn't have it's own background layer(s), unless they faked them with sprites or something.

By the way, I removed all the sprites from the Knuckles Chaotic screenshot that I could find and the color count was like 40 something, which is more than Genesis backgrounds can handle. Maybe the Genesis was producing sprites in that shot as well or something? I'm not doubting what you said or anything, but any info regarding that would be appreciated! Anyway, I really need to get a 32x!

[awack]

Joe's right about the difference the 32x makes to genesis games, check out the link below.


http://www.gamepilgrimage.com/SSF2compare.htm

[Joe Redifer]

The 32X does one background in Kolibri, usually the one closest to your face (re: on top).  How did you "remove" the sprites from the Knuckles' Chaotix pic?  Just blanking them out with black?  Don't forget to remove the sparklies, rings and the score as well.  It is possible that they supplemented the BG with sprites.

[Joe Redifer]

Joe's right about the difference the 32x makes to genesis games, check out the link below.


http://www.gamepilgrimage.com/SSF2compare.htm

A little "note" about those screenshots.  You might think the 32X ones look way too saturated.  I have noticed that when recording 32X video to my computer, it is extremely saturated for some reason and I can't figure out why.  But this is not the case when playing on a TV or recording to a VCR.  I'll try and post a good side-by-side.

[awack]

But this is not the case when playing on a TV or recording to a VCR.  I'll try and post a good side-by-side.

Cool, i always wanted to get a 32x for the video improvement it would give to regular genesis games but always thought that the colors looked bad from the screenshots i have seen, like the color is set way to high on the tv, i might have to get one now.

Here is another comparison, look at the vertical bars.

http://www.gamepilgrimage.com/ShinobiIIIcompare.htm

[Keranu]

The 32X does one background in Kolibri, usually the one closest to your face (re: on top).  How did you "remove" the sprites from the Knuckles' Chaotix pic?  Just blanking them out with black?  Don't forget to remove the sparklies, rings and the score as well.  It is possible that they supplemented the BG with sprites.

I removed Knuckles, the sparkles, the rings, the score, and some other creature that was on the screen by blanking them out. I'll have to check out the ROM some time.

Great links, awack! You can really see the rainbows in the Shinobi comparison.

[CrackTiger]

Since the video was transmitted via RGB from the Genesis, composite video with a 32X playing a regular Genesis game looks much better than composite video from the Genesis itself.  No more vertical rainbow stripes.  Less fuzziness.  Much better.  In short, just having a 32X attached and hooked up properly fixes all of the Genesis' composite video shortcomings.

Does the 32X really make a difference with any Genesis, or just the original model?

[Turbo D]

How the heck do I use a 32x to make my genesis games look better, I thought that only 32x games fit in its socket 

[Joe Redifer]

The 32X has it's own NTSC video encoder.  It works with any Genesis... except the Genesis 3 or the Nomad.  I don't recall if the Genesis 2 has the vertical bars in composite or not.  If you have a Genesis modded for s-video, you will not be able to use the s-video with the 32X since the RGB video from the Genesis is sent to the 32X before it is output.  You would see the Genesis-only video through the s-video.

Here are some pics I took with a digital camera due to the aforementioned saturation issue.  All connections are composite:


Pretty big difference if you ask me.

And some other stuff just for fun:


Kolibri with and without the 32X video applied.  Just run the composite cable straight from the Genesis to see this instead of from the 32X.


Knuckles' Chaotix, same thing.


Space Harrier.

How the heck do I use a 32x to make my genesis games look better, I thought that only 32x games fit in its socket

Genesis games fit in the 32X slot.  That would suck to have to remove the thing.

[Tatsujin]

haha..the last space harrier comparison rules. only the background in the horizont came from the MD

so the 32X has its own s-video output? which also normal MD games can be played and displayed on the screen via the 32X? great news

[Keranu]

Awesome screens, Joe! That's really awesome just by switching the cable around you can just the Genesis graphics! It's really amazing how Kolibri turned out with just the Genesis graphics.

[CrackTiger]

haha..the last space harrier comparison rules. only the background in the horizont came from the MD

so the 32X has its own s-video output? which also normal MD games can be played and displayed on the screen via the 32X? great news

No, the 32X has the same output connection as the Genesis II. The only way you can get anything better than composite out of it is to either use an XMD-2 or line RGB out and convert it to S-Video or Component.

[handygrafx]

ah ha!  I too think that's an awesome comparison, Joe.   

It's cool to see what the Megadrive/Genesis does as far as graphics in each of those 32X games.  it does more in Kolibri than I expected.

I did the same thing with AfterBurner Complete.  The Genesis (IIRC) did the score, and the horizon bar indicator and maybe the rest of the stats while 32x did everything related to the graphics.

[handygrafx]

as for NEC's involvement with the Dreamcast -- it's not what some of you might think.  they didn't really design any of the hardware.  they didn't design the graphics chip.  Videologic designed the PowerVR2DC graphics in Dreamcast, NEC only manufactured it.    NEC also manufactured (but did not designed) the  ArtX-designed Flipper GPU in Gamecube.   

IIRC NEC also manufactures the ATI-designed Hollywood GPU in Wii.


NEC had/has less ties to the Dreamcast and Gamecube (and Wii) than the did with the
PC-Engine ~ TurboGrafx-16 ~ CD-ROM, SuperGrafx, Duo (etc) and FX systems, which they were directly involved with those systems success (or lack of it)... NEC was probably more involved with the design of the hardware (even though Hudson did most of the work) on their systems.   with Sega and Nintendo systems, NEC was just the company that fabbed the graphics and embedded memory chips.

[handygrafx]

Now here's a fun poll:

What do you think would've benefitted more? The Turbo Grafx 16 having an extra background layer or the Genesis having palette capabilities as the TG16  ? We sorta already have a TG16 with an extra background layer thanks to the Super Grafx, but I'd like to hear comments regarding this .

ohhh I like this one. I'd have to think about it more.....    my first reaction would be to say Genesis with TG16's palette capabilities (including on-screen colors at once)...

[TurboXray]

as for NEC's involvement with the Dreamcast -- it's not what some of you might think.  they didn't really design any of the hardware.  they didn't design the graphics chip.  Videologic designed the PowerVR2DC graphics in Dreamcast, NEC only manufactured it.    NEC also manufactured (but did not designed) the  ArtX-designed Flipper GPU in Gamecube.   

IIRC NEC also manufactures the ATI-designed Hollywood GPU in Wii.


NEC had/has less ties to the Dreamcast and Gamecube (and Wii) than the did with the
PC-Engine ~ TurboGrafx-16 ~ CD-ROM, SuperGrafx, Duo (etc) and FX systems, which they were directly involved with those systems success (or lack of it)... NEC was probably more involved with the design of the hardware (even though Hudson did most of the work) on their systems.   with Sega and Nintendo systems, NEC was just the company that fabbed the graphics and embedded memory chips.

NEC did the CD hardware for the base unit, the main system arch is Hudsons design (all hudson designed and fab'd chips). From what I've read, Hudson licensed the design/system arch to NEC.

[CosMind]

Now here's a fun poll:

What do you think would've benefitted more? The Turbo Grafx 16 having an extra background layer or the Genesis having palette capabilities as the TG16  ? We sorta already have a TG16 with an extra background layer thanks to the Super Grafx, but I'd like to hear comments regarding this .

i'd have to toss my hat into the "genesis with tg16 palette" ring.
i'm a sucker for rich color work, so any palette enhancement option is always going to get my vote

[handygrafx]

as for NEC's involvement with the Dreamcast -- it's not what some of you might think.  they didn't really design any of the hardware.  they didn't design the graphics chip.  Videologic designed the PowerVR2DC graphics in Dreamcast, NEC only manufactured it.    NEC also manufactured (but did not designed) the  ArtX-designed Flipper GPU in Gamecube.   

IIRC NEC also manufactures the ATI-designed Hollywood GPU in Wii.


NEC had/has less ties to the Dreamcast and Gamecube (and Wii) than the did with the
PC-Engine ~ TurboGrafx-16 ~ CD-ROM, SuperGrafx, Duo (etc) and FX systems, which they were directly involved with those systems success (or lack of it)... NEC was probably more involved with the design of the hardware (even though Hudson did most of the work) on their systems.   with Sega and Nintendo systems, NEC was just the company that fabbed the graphics and embedded memory chips.

NEC did the CD hardware for the base unit, the main system arch is Hudsons design (all hudson designed and fab'd chips). From what I've read, Hudson licensed the design/system arch to NEC.

that sounds right.

[Tatsujin]

haha..the last space harrier comparison rules. only the background in the horizont came from the MD

so the 32X has its own s-video output? which also normal MD games can be played and displayed on the screen via the 32X? great news

No, the 32X has the same output connection as the Genesis II. The only way you can get anything better than composite out of it is to either use an XMD-2 or line RGB out and convert it to S-Video or Component.

thanks, now i got the post from red above. a shame, i was already hoping for a very cheap way, how to put my MD on the the TV set via S-Video

[NecroPhile]

Can you name a single game on the Genesis that could not be done on the Engine?

I can!

Try this: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=X8N4iKigWm4
Or this: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=F1yTzR61A9A
And even this: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=R5OHr9H4yrU

I don't remember anything too spectacular in Earthworm Jim 2, so I think the PC Engine could pull it off (it's been about 84 years since I played it and I don't see anything amazing on the youtube vids).  I'll give you Sonic, and I don't know if a good port of Gynoug could be done and I don't care.  That background looks like shit, though maybe it looks better on a real system. 

I didn't mean to imply that the PCE can do everything that the Genesis can, though my post certainly sounded like I did.  If I were capable of forming consistently coherent posts, I would have asserted that most Genny games could be done on the PCE with only minor variation and visa versa, most PCE games could be competently done on the Genesis.  The two systems are pretty close graphics wise (in my opinion, of course), so I have a problem with O.T.B.'s blanket statement that the Turbo's graphics are 'not up to snuff'.  It's just as fanboyish as saying that the Genesis graphics suck when compared to the Engine just because the PCE can produce more colors.  Sure, it'd be nice if the Engine had a second background layer, but quite a few games have nice parallax despite this limitation.

Now here's a fun poll:

What do you think would've benefitted more? The Turbo Grafx 16 having an extra background layer or the Genesis having palette capabilities as the TG16  ? We sorta already have a TG16 with an extra background layer thanks to the Super Grafx, but I'd like to hear comments regarding this .

Interesting question, Keranu.  Original Genesis games are often nicely colored, since the developers didn't have to try and match colors to something else.  A better palette wouldn't really matter in some of my favorite Genny games, but would certainly help out some dully colored ports.  On the other hand, the Turbo getting the extra background layer would be great (hardware scaling and rotation would be even better).  Some games did a good job of faking the backgrounds, so not much would be gained in some cases.  I don't know which would really make a bigger impact, so I'll flip a coin.  It came up heads, so I'm voting for the Turbo gaining a second background plane.

[OldTurboBastard]

Now here's a fun poll:

What do you think would've benefitted more? The Turbo Grafx 16 having an extra background layer or the Genesis having palette capabilities as the TG16  ? We sorta already have a TG16 with an extra background layer thanks to the Super Grafx, but I'd like to hear comments regarding this .

Of course I'd say the turbo with the extra BG plane (i'd better after this thread...) but the genesis could have definitetly used the extra color. Alot of games came off "dark" or maybe "dim" is the better term on the genesis, even when using the bright colors.

Too bad we could'nt have seen more from the supergrafx. The backgrounds in Aldynes did'nt take great advantage really, yeah they were multi-plane but not all that impressive (maybe this is because I knew it was no longer a challenge to pull off...hmmmmm), although some of the giant bosses were cool (not sure if any actually used the second BG plane) . Ghouls and Ghosts was cool, but we'd seen it before...Would have been great to see some more original shoot 'em up stuff on there having so many sprites and the dual BG layer.

[Joe Redifer]

Here is an oversaturated looping animated GIF of Kolibri scrolling that I created for no reason other than to piss off dial up users 



PS - It's really not that jerky.  It lost something in the Quicktime-to-GIF conversion.  I apologize.  Please don't ban me!

[Ceti Alpha]

Too bad we could'nt have seen more from the supergrafx.

I agree. It's a shame that the Supergrafx had such a short shelf life. Seems like such a waste to only have a handful of games for a system. NEC/TTI really should have concentrated solely on the next 32 bit (PC FX) or even a 64 bit system. I mean NEC should by all rights be running the gaming show at this stage of the game. They had already figured out the CD format before other companies had even thought about it. It just seems like they were spreading themselves thin releasing a bunch of different versions of the PC Engine and PC Engine Duo, the Supergrafx and whatnot. I would have really liked to have seen a 3D Bonk game in the likes of Super Mario World, or a 3D Dungeon Explorer. 

[Tatsujin]

they just should've made the DUO based on the SGFX technology, then all would've be fine!!

[Ceti Alpha]

they just should've made the DUO based on the SGFX technology, then all would've be fine!!

Indeed. Though I wonder why NEC just didn't put a 16-bit processor in the Supergrafx. Seems like a lot of trouble to go through building a new machine to only make it a little better than the PC Engine. I guess that's why it failed. 

I just remember seeing the Supergrafx for sale in the gaming magazines of the day and thinking it was so mysterious. What was it like? What were the games like? There was only ever a tiny picture of it in the advertising pages so it was hard to tell how big it was and the finer details of it.

I guess the only reason I would ever want one is if for nostalgia's sake. But I would have to find a pretty sweet deal.

[TurboXray]

Indeed. Though I wonder why NEC just didn't put a 16-bit processor in the Supergrafx. Seems like a lot of trouble to go through building a new machine to only make it a little better than the PC Engine. I guess that's why it failed. 

Why? That would make it not backwards compatible. The original processor in the PC Engine is fast enough - much faster than the SNES CPU and its video arch was much more complex than the SGX. I'd take an increase palette over a processor upgrade. Actually the PC-FX is sort of what the SGX (or PC-Engine 2) was supposed to be = increased palette, new processor, twin VDCs (the same as the SGX), scaling/rotation BG layer. It even has the same PSG audio system. Maybe PC Engine 2 was upgraded into a PC-FX (new processor and iDCT for MPEG) and the SGX was stripped and released to buy them some time until the PC-FX could be released? I wouldn't doubt that since the SCD was doing so good, that they delayed the release of the PC-FX (in whatever state/revision it was in), but that's just pure speculation.

[NecroPhile]

Why? That would make it not backwards compatible. The original processor in the PC Engine is fast enough - much faster than the SNES CPU and its video arch was much more complex than the SGX.

Agreed, but could they have jacked up the 6280's speed but left it switchable to the original speed?  I'm guessing that the original processor will choke if it has to handle 128 sprites at once (*cough* snes slowdown *cough*).

Maybe PC Engine 2 was upgraded into a PC-FX (new processor and iDCT for MPEG) and the SGX was stripped and released to buy them some time until the PC-FX could be released?

I doubt it, as there's five years between the two.  The PC-FX is far too advanced for '89, and would've been far too expensive.  Even NEC wouldn't have been dumb enough to develop such a failure.... wait, that's exactly what they did.  Twice, though their failures weren't due to price.

[Ceti Alpha]

That would make it not backwards compatible.

I see your point, but this goes back to my original point a few posts up. Why did NEC even bother with the Supergrafx in the first place? They didn't need to buy time until the PC-FX because the PC Engine was still holding its own. People didn't want to shell out coin for a new system that had crazy expensive games. This is all speculation, but I tend to believe that if NEC played their cards better not only in North America, but in Japan as well, they would one of the big names in the gaming industry today. But there's obviously no way to prove that. 

[ccovell]

This may sound like Greek but give it some thought:

White Elephants to Take the Wind out of the Opponent's Sails

[Ceti Alpha]

White Elephants to Take the Wind out of the Opponent's Sails

OK, I'm probably misinterpreting your statement here, but from what I can gather you are saying that the Supergrafx is the "White Elephant".  I am able to see the Supergrafx as a white elephant. It is at the same time a blessing and a curse - excellent graphics yet of no real practical use. There are only a handful of games and the hardware is underutilized due to technical issues. But yet the games it does have are better than its opponents.

Is that what you're saying here? Or am I way off? hehe 

[NecroPhile]

I believe that Chris is saying that NEC wanted to steal some of Nintendo's thunder by rushing the SuperGrafx out the door ahead of the SNES.  It makes sense to me: they got a little of the big N's media attention for themselves and then abandoned the SuperGrafx once it served its purpose.

[Ceti Alpha]

I believe that Chris is saying that NEC wanted to steal some of Nintendo's thunder by rushing the SuperGrafx out the door ahead of the SNES.  It makes sense to me: they got a little of the big N's media attention for themselves and then abandoned the SuperGrafx once it served its purpose.

Ah, OK. hehe. Yeah, true. I guess I've always underestimated the effect Supergrafx had on the Super Famicon in Japan.  Did it really take that much wind out of the SF's sails?

[BonkThis]

I see alot on here with folks trying to declare the turbo as having more impressive graphics than the genesis.

The Turbo could replicate the missing extra plane by using sprites, but the Genesis couldn't do anything about the lack of colors (which resulted in nicely detailed games with washed out colors).

but the turbo struggled to pull it off and sacrificed sprites to do it half as well. After hearing from some others in here, that's still the main (and perhaps only) disavantage of the turbo, but it's a big one in my book that. I don't think i've ever looked at a genesis game and siad "this would great if i had three more shades of aqua #3". I have definitely fired up a turbo game (forgotten worlds etc) and said "where' the parallax?" or better yet noticed the background flickering in psychosis cause it's really an extra sprite that the turbo can't handle.

having said all this, I still love the Turbo as i said before the games sem to have a quality that makes them more fun to play.

That a refund on the 2 cents

mortal kombat on the genesis made me wish for more color.

[handygrafx]

SuperGrafx could not have been the PC-FX in 1989 or even 1990. that would not be possible or practical.


what the SuperGrafx should have been, IMO, is something more like  a "Super X68000" in a console, with a faster clocked 68000.  without the floppy disc drives,  with more colors on screen (4096) the same palette (65,536)  the addition of true hardware scaling & rotation.  maybe more sprites (say 256 16x16).    something roughly as powerful as Sega's highend boards with Super-Scaler technology.   a real leap above the PC-Engine, something with more power than the SNES,  more or less on par with the NEO-GEO, though more reasonably priced with games costing no more than $90.      also the "Super CD-ROM" should've been a CD-ROM for this SuperGrafx.  the regular PC-Engine would use CD-ROM2  system card 1.0 2.0, 3.0 etc but leave Super-CD-ROM exclusive to SuperGrafx. even if only say 50 or 40 or so SuperGrafx  SHu-Cards and SCDs came out, if the quality of the games remained very high, it would've been so much more worthwhile.

[awack]

My understanding of the super grafx thang is that it was made in anticipation of the release of the super famicom which they (NEC/HUDSON) thought was going to be much more powerful than it turned out to be.

They must have thought that the pc engine + cd with future memory upgrades could easily compete with the super famicom, hell, look at the two games that were released on regular pc engine hucard and the super famicom, raiden and street fighter 2, raiden being superior and street fighter is up in the air.

[Joe Redifer]

I doubt the SuperGrafx-16 took much wind out of the Super Famicom's sails.  It had much more in common with the Mega Drive than it did with the SFC.  It couldn't even perform the state-of-the-art space-age cutting-edge MODE 7 that the Super Famicom could do.  The Japanese laughed at the SGX because it was perceived to be weak compared to the SFC which was more powerful than motherfuckin' Buddha hisself.  Did other magazines report good things about the SuperGrafx-16?  I highly doubt it.  The only magazine with relevance in Japan seems to be Famitsu.  Just look at the name of that magazine.  Famitsu.  Translated to English, it literally means "We love the fucking Famicom and everything Nintendo makes or does.  If you want to talk about something other than Nintendo, then GTFO and STFU".  The more accurate translation does not contain the "GTFO" part but does contain "STFU".  The magazine's name wasn't Enginitsu.  It's almost like Nintendo Power singing praises of the TurboGrafx.

[Keranu]

Joe is full of wisdom, I love his commentary on Japanese translations! 

[TurboXray]

SuperGrafx could not have been the PC-FX in 1989 or even 1990. that would not be possible or practical.

I didn't say the SGX was the PC-FX. I was speculating the SGX was the stripped down version of the PC Engine 2, released to buy some time/stall the competition, while work on the PC Engine 2 evolved - eventually into the PC-FX.

 It's not hard to see the similarity.

The PCE is made up of: CPU(huc6280), PSGPCM unit(on the CPU die), VCE (video & color/palette generation), and a VDC(sprites/BG).

The SGX is made up of: CPU(6280). PSGPCM(on CPU die), a VCE, two VDCs, and a priority controller for the VDCs.

The PC-FX is made up of: v810 32bit RISC CPU by NEC (not hudson this time), a VCE (a newer version but still a VCE), two VDCs(nothing different than the SGX or PCE), a video priority controller (a little more complex than the SGXs), and KING ( it's own BG unit that can scale and rotate only it's own BG, not sprites or BGs from the VDCs), an iDCT for decoding MPEG frames and RLE bitmaps (RAINBOW), and two ADPCM controllers(the same as the PCE CD unit). I've also been told the SCSI interface (proprietary SCSI version) is *very* similar to the PCE CD's. It even uses the same MCU from the CD unit that the original PCE CD used (probably with updated rom though).

You can see the similarity to the SGX with its two VDCs, a VCE, and a PSG unit. The priority controller was integrated into the VCE (makes sense). The ADPCM is the same type as the PCE CD used as is the CD MCU(SCSI).  KING (Hudson's chip) handled the scaling and rotation of it's own BG layers (up to 4). The 32bit RISC CPU was available in 1990 so it that puts it in the time frame. IMO, the PC-FX was definitely doable in '90-92. Heh- besides the CPU it seems at the support chips are Hudson's.

Also notice the name progressions:

Original VCE -huc6260, FX VCE - huc6261
Original VDC -huc6270, FX KING VDC -huc6272 (huc6271 is the mpeg/bitmap layer of RAINBOW - a VDC chip).

The Huc6273 was the 3D chip for the addon card. There are no skips in the naming progression.

Does anyone have some specs/links/or scans of the PC Engine 2 articles?

[Tatsujin]

SuperGrafx could not have been the PC-FX in 1989 or even 1990. that would not be possible or practical.

what the SuperGrafx should have been, IMO, is something more like  a "Super X68000" in a console, with a faster clocked 68000.  without the floppy disc drives,  with more colors on screen (4096) the same palette (65,536)  the addition of true hardware scaling & rotation.  maybe more sprites (say 256 16x16).    something roughly as powerful as Sega's highend boards with Super-Scaler technology.   a real leap above the PC-Engine, something with more power than the SNES,  more or less on par with the NEO-GEO, though more reasonably priced with games costing no more than $90.      also the "Super CD-ROM" should've been a CD-ROM for this SuperGrafx.  the regular PC-Engine would use CD-ROM2  system card 1.0 2.0, 3.0 etc but leave Super-CD-ROM exclusive to SuperGrafx. even if only say 50 or 40 or so SuperGrafx  SHu-Cards and SCDs came out, if the quality of the games remained very high, it would've been so much more worthwhile.

that sounds like something Fujitsu did with their marty but didn't succeed either, even with a typical PCE soft lineup (> some very great shooter, RPGs, mah jong, erotic [and more..], div. mixed genres etc..

but i see your point. NEC had the great chance to create a following successor to th PCE because its already big popularity at that time as a game manufacturer, but didn't choose the right time. 1990 was too early, coz the PCE was still on its top, and when they came up with the PC-FX, the 32-Bit Polygon era was just a little step ahead.

[Tatsujin]

Joe is full of wisdom, I love his commentary on Japanese translations! 

yeah, that one was a great fun