SEGA/Nintendo vs Xbox/Playstation - best rivalry all time?

I gotta go with Sega/Nintendo. Probably for the nostalgia factor, but I also thought they were pretty distinct consoles. A true rivalry. There are many similarities between Xbox and Playstation. Back then, I felt like Sega people and Nintendo people were very different. What do you think, SW?

Sega and Nintendo was two entirely different products with two very different ways of approaching the market engaging in some actual, ballsy and antagonistic advertising and dirty, below the belt tactics in an attempt to one up each other.

PlayStation/Xbox is two different flavors of the same product, with few exceptions.

The Sega vs Nintendo rivalry, 16 bit era in particular, gets my vote simply due to the fact that we actually had major gameplay differences in some multiplatform games. Aladdin, The Adventures of Batman & Robin, Batman Returns, and Jurassic Park to name a few.

Best ever?

Nintendo vs. The World

I wish Xbox/Playstation was not even a thing.

To be associated with xbox and lemmings is an insult in itself.

It was a different industry. As for the community, it was more about the game than the brand. The games defined the brand. There wasn't fanboys saying, "well that game sucks" as it was more akin to a sega owner owning up to the fact of a good snes game.

There is far more hate between the PlayStation and Xbox camps then there ever was between Sega and Nintendo. The competition between the 90s' consoles was great. It was healthy and paved the way for improvement on both sides. The competition between the current two competitors is far and above what it should be mostly due to fans and the advent of the internet giving the general population a voice. A voice that should probably never have been provided as it's now hurting the industry.

And the last time we got games with differences like that were from EA in the PS2/XBOX/GC era and the PC versions.

Oh yeah, and in some cases, other third parties and their differences on multiplats for Wii and PS3/360/PC (Sonic Unleashed and Star Wars: The Force Unleashed II being the best examples).

Anyway, my choice would be SEGA vs Ninty.

The Sega vs. Nintendo rivialry is what I can vividly remember.

Sega vs Nintendo easily. The amount of great shit that came from Sega and Nintendo alone and their in house studios? It's nothing but a hall of fame roster. Microsoft vs Sony between the 2 first party companies you have what, a whopping 5 or 6 honest to god Great games between the two of them? It's not even close.

Back in the 16 bit days, you compared Sonic to Mario, Final Fight to Streets of Rage. Sega had the gory version of Mortal Kombat, but SNES had Street Fighter II. SNES had more RPGs, but Sega had Phantasy Star and Shining Force. Both systems had entirely different Castlevania and Contra games. The Xbox vs PS war has been reduced to some nerds counting pixels and FPS on some website to decide which system has "the definitive version" of the exact same game.

Microsoft vs Sony is a bigger rivalry

Nintendo and Sega rivalry got serious in the 90s, but that battle ended when the Sony Playstation swooped in, Sony took out Sega not Nintendo, and when Sega was gone it's not like Nintendo was around to cheer about it

as far as the MS-Sony rivalry goes both companies have been losing money attempting to reach market dominance, I expect this trend to continue for years, and it's a competition I think that's greatly improved gaming, both companies have put lots of money behind giving gamers great experiences and trying to win their support, party can't last forever but it can be a blast

...............and scene.

So true lol.

SEGA vs Nintendo rivalry was like WCW vs WWF

it was a great time to be a consumer/viewer you got the best out of both worlds from that rivalry.

SONY vs Microsoft is more like Verizon vs AT&T ,

not much to write home about.

Definitely SEGA vs NINTENDO. Especially the 16-Bit Generation, which I vividly remember growing up.

Both consoles had their respective exclusives, both had strong 3rd party support and both had an identity.

And you can easily own them both systems, because you had a reason to own them both, WITHOUT being redundant.

Sony came, killed Sega and kicked Nintendo-Ass.

PLAYSTATION VS XBOX changed gaming meanwhile SEGA vs Nintendo did not change so much.

A stipulation must be added here.

You're not allowed to post in this thread if you weren't alive and gaming back then. Lest we end up with shit like this.

It is partially true. Sega was already in the process of digging their grave by losing control of product support with too many things on the market at the same time. Meanwhile, Nintendo was continuously making 3rd party relations worse and worse--these developers already knew of the cart medium for the n64. So then there is Sony left on the drawing board with a somewhat developed console concept as the snes cd add on "playstation." Sony went for it and made all the right moves. They capitalized on the mistakes of the others on the market.

...Playstation vs Xbox didn't change gaming. The popularity of online gaming in the west via pc, and further popularized by branded "xbox live" changed gaming. The Playstation 2 was a caveman compared to xbox live. Had Microsoft not made that push it is likely the online systems would not have developed as fast.

Haha. Good rule. I would add that FreedomFreeLife shouldn't be allowed to post in any thread.

SEGA popularized online gaming. They started way back in 1994 with the SEGA Channel for the Genesis.

They tried to push NetLINK on the ill-faited Sega Saturn.

Then online gaming became a reality with the Dreamcast taking everyone into the new millennium with multiplayer online gaming.

Dreamcast paved the way for Xbox and Xbox LIVE which eventually finally got SONY on board with PSN.

@SolidGame_basic: Rivarly between Xbox and PS since when ? I mean lol ...

I'm aware, but those were niche markets. If I remember correctly, some of the same directors moved on to xbox, from dreamcast. Remember, this was 1999. PC was gaining massive popularity at this time. You can't restrict this to just consoles as in this area pc must be counted. Xbox Live was the one that got it right--it deserves the most credit, imo.

Sega went against a massive juggernaut that had approximately 90% market share control, snatched 55% and battled it out for years with a bone crunching intensity that resulted in neither clearly dominating the other, until the very end where Sega tripped on its own feet going into a hellhole of poor management (expensive addons, the Saturn), while Nintendo held on as strong as ever focusing on strengthening the SNES's library.

The brilliant array of exclusives that resulted from that was nothing short of a miracle, both of which had fundamentally different experiences that put emphasis on their strength.

Sega vs. Nintendo is, and will always be infinitely more memorable and impressive than any other joke of a 'console war'.

I cannot tell whether or not you are agreeing or disagreeing, but I am agreeing with what you are saying. It boils down to market size, as well. The battle was more intense back then as kids/families were generally single console owners. Things like people being impressed with "mode 7" and sega finding ways to combat that, or Starfox and Virtua Racing/Silpheed(spelling?). The benefit was always the gamer though, not the financials. Magazines were not afraid to call out poor games. Gamers called out poor games. HUGELY marketed games like Rise of the Robots(that could be the wrong titles)--the cgi-renedered looking game was marketed to death but just got panned by everyone.

A strange thing during that gen was the Neo Geo. That thing cost a fortune but must have been making money as it saw support for a LONG time.

Another thing was that companies couldn't really get away with the "well it looks the best on this console" scheme. EVERY SINGLE GAMER I knew back then wanted a 3DO for Super Street Fighter 2, but the other games simply didn't justify the cost. ...off topic but I just picked up a near mint 3DO, save for the controller port prongs out of wack, and boy is that fine looking console. It certainly feels premium....Need to get Road Rash--best version.

................Also the whole "generation" thing is a bunch of bs imo. A generation is the game design and gets support--the consoles are the vessels. There's all these claims of this console is in this gen, that console is in that gen. I disagree with that but now I'm going off topic and wondering why the Legacy Board is no longer here.

I'm gonna say Microsoft vs Sony is the biggest, the fact they have been at it for 3 gens, is saying something, and they have become very neck n neck, with only the slight differences in graphics and gameplay.

Yes there isn't much difference in games, but the problem is games cost a lot more now than they did then, and huge development teams make it so that the same game is released on all platforms and we don't get that diversity we once did with the sega and nintendo era.

But don't let my choice reflect how crazy advertisment and banter was even in TV adverts way back then.

I mean people go on about how graphics never mattered and all this but the era of the snes and mega drive, all they did was boost about how amazing the graphics was.

Solid points, but Sega and Nintendo were IN-HOUSE game developers. This was their thing. Make it or break it.

How MS vs Sony is a bigger rivalry ?

Ps2 massacred Xbox

X360 ended on par with PS3 sales wise despite it had a whole year more in the market , Sony being in a serious multibillion loss every single year of PS3s existence while PS3 itself was a super problematic hardware while it was losing exclusives to X360 while it was sooo overpriced ... did i forget to say Ps3 was losing multiplatform war also ?

And even with so many PS3 problems what X360 did ? Nothing ... Same sales as PS3 in the end of generation .. You call that rivalry ? I call that circus ...

And now that PS4 made zero of Ps3 mistakes ... What rivalry exactly ? PS4 selling way more worldwide as we speak despite the countless price cuts , free games and reverse policies of X1. So what rivarly again ?

Very true and that was the great thing about that era, didn't cost much and both had solid game development teams which could throw out games within months, we all have to remember most games had a simplistic story and was based on the same old side scrolling platform based game style, I mean if you look back at the type of games which were out, the only differences were character models and settings, but the actual core gameplay were practically the same, except of course for some of the great RPG games,

Nowadays we demand 100 times more from a game,

But you have a great point tho, that era was great for in-house game development.

SEGA/Nintendo for sure.......SEGA does what Nintendon't.....cannot beat that.

I can't agree about gameplay. Sidescrollers were definitely the genre of the time, like fps of last gen, but they most certainly did not all play the same. You are selling that gen short, or perhaps your memory is fuzzy. There were so many genres being played around with then--rpgs, tactical rpgs, fighting games, arcade games, light gun games, various styles of racing games, platformers, action platformers, adventure games..............i'm not even doing a good job describing this. You say we demand 100 times more from a game. I don't believe that to be true. I think gamers demand less, as they are happy with the same thing over and over again, buy buggy games, and support all this dlc nonsense. Back then if a game like Assassins Creed Unity was released NOBODY would buy. Magazines would likely inform the consumer of the situation.

SEGA was the true innovator.

Sega vs Nintendo = a little bit better graphics upgrade

Playstation came out, Sega was killed and Nintendo lost their position.

There was no Sega vs Nintendo since Nintendo wanted to team up with Sony but Sony saw that Nintendo and Sega were weak, they think "old way" and Sony gave huge graphics jump, gave us CD gaming and killed Sega and Nintendo lost their positsion. Look at Nintendo. Nintendo has only Wii U with own Nintendo exclusives but nothing else. Sony and Microsoft has a whole world.

Sega vs Nintendo = game studio vs game studio. Sony vs Microsoft = movie, multimedia, electronic vs Windows, Cloud

Xbox vs Playstation gave us = online gaming, friend list and voice chat, matchmaking, single ID, trophies/achivements, updates, dlcs, community, cloud gaming. Not only that, but we finally had motion gaming like Kinect games. Then it was no longer only about gaming but multimedia like watching movies, buy music, movies, play demos, surf internet, buying exclusive games, 3d gaming and like that.

Sega did not push online gaming. Online gaming was already on PC. In fact Halo was this game that changed online gaming on consoles.

Boy you fail at discussions. How are you going to talk about legacy between consoles and then interject PC into your argument.

That would be like discussion the greatest baseball teams and here you come in the discussion talking about the NY Jets.

The Sega/Nintendo rivalry was the best. They actually pushed each other and spawned some innovation in the gaming industry.

The XBOX/Playstation rivalry is shit and has spawned nothing but trollish back and forth between virgins on message boards like this.

Maybe my memory is fuzzy and I'm not denying there were amazing games, but there were alot more filler games in that gen than we get now.

What I mean by we demand 100 times more is, the detail and complexity of the games we receive, unlike in the era of sega and nintendo, games were being made within months due to the simplicity of them, now it takes 2 or 3 years to create a game so we end up having less in house games than we did before.

gamers back then were happy and amazed at what we got, nowadays it seems to be any game which isn't amazing is now rubbish I mean now we complain if a game gets a 7, and a 7 is above average game or it should be but gamers today don't see that, if it ain't 8 or above the game gets slated.

but your totally right games like AC would never of made it back then, but now we have everybody and anybody buying into it, so they'll never change, patches seem to be the future now

different eras, but I agree with alot of posts saying that the xbox and ps are pretty much the same consoles with different brand names. Only difference is halo on xbox vs uncharted(maybe) on the playstation. Of course halo single handedly slaughters every single ps game available in terms of markettability and fun. The only reason playstation is still alive is because of japanese support (from customers and developers), and microsoft getting full of themselves(by trying to DRM, no used games, etc etc). If it weren't for these two reasons, we would see a sega version 2.0 with the playstation, and they'd be another crack in the anal holes of history.

The Nintendo vs Sega rivalry is the best one. Nothing else in the industry even comes close.

You blind or something? I said PC only about online. PC online was before Sega. But everything else was Sony vs Microsoft.

Ah, i wasn't sure what you meant by partially agreeing with that FreedomFreeLife person, so i just wanted to elaborate upon what i feel is the best confrontation between two console manufacturers.

Those where different times for sure, more ballsy. The crazy commercials and straight up trash talk between SEGA and Nintendo is one of the reasons why i think that it's the most memorable 'war'. That type of stuff would never ever fly today.

Yep, sadly true.

your post isn't making any sense. Sega vs Nintendo was just a little bit of a graphics upgrade? Sega vs Nintendo BUILT THE INDUSTRY. I don't think you understand how big this was. You must have been rather young, and I mean no disrespect by that. There was sonic everywhere. There was mario everywhere. The ads stressed this. They both had MULTIPLE tv shows. Nintendo had its own childrens breakfast cereal. Sega was all over the arcades. Nintendo had Gameboy; Sega brought out Gamegear. There was a consistent battle between the two, often resulting in quality game/product.

I've stated many times on this forum about Sony capitalizing on the situation going on at this time. I don't discredit that, but Playstation 2 didn't have to do a thing vs the xbox--it outsold that console by maybe 100 MILLION units(probably more). This is why Sony never bothered with any online service with ps2. And if you look at the ps3 launch era, xbox live was still leagues ahead. It was only when 3rd parties needed some level of parity for dlc/etc that sony took notice. Sony and Microsoft were barely at war last gen. It was closer to actually working TOGETHER. DLC, sub fees, etc. These two became the slave to the 3rd parties, eventually.

This

Exactly this

You're right on all points, but you're arguing with FreedomFreeLife, one of the biggest shitposters on this board. Not worth it.

Sony and Microsoft are competing to see who can backstab consumers the most. They are NOT competing to deliver the best product. So Nintendo & SEGA.

The only way S&M are properly competing may be pricing and for the hardware you get they are both incredibly expensive if you count the royalties and fees.

Sega vs Nintendo will never be beaten.

Sega/Nintendo was good fun, and each side knew the other had a good console. I miss the old style adverts Sega had full of innuendo.

Xbox has nothing going for it and its remaining fanbase are bitter, emotionally inept losers. There's no charm to its existence.

Back in the days of Sega vs Nintendo, gaming was pretty niche, and the majority of gamers ranged from kids to hapless pimply faced virgins that have never seen a clitoris in their life.

Fast forward to present day in the rivalry between Playstation vs Xbox, and gaming is actually MUCH more popular and diverse.

Me vs Society. :(