For thirty years, gamers have been arguing about one thing: Which Aladdin game is best – Super NES or Genesis? It's a debate that has been raging ever since the two games launched in the same month, and every time you think there's a definitive winner, the two sides find a new thing to fight about. But what did the critics say in the 1990s? Was it this back-and-forth, or was there a clear winner in this 16-bit showdown? To answer those questions, I decided to flip through the pages of Electronic Gaming Monthly, Die Hard Game Fan, Computer & Video Games, Hyper, Game Players and more classic magazines that reviewed both versions of Aladdin when they first came out. Today we're going to see where the critics landed in this thirty-year-old battle and maybe even settle this debate once and for all. This is Magazine Match-Up.


We're going to kick things off with the most competitive match-up of the day, and it comes from none other than Electronic Gaming Monthly. Here we see a quarter of a point separate the two games, with the Genesis version earning an 8.5 out of 10, while the Super NES game is slightly behind with an 8.25. That's pretty close, but you wouldn't know it based on their year-end game awards segment featured in the 1994 Video Game Buyer's Guide. The Genesis game mopped up the competition, taking the Best Movie Game and Best Animation categories, as well as earning the spot as Genesis Game of the Year.

Don't worry, not all of the match-ups are going to be as close as Electronic Gaming Monthly. Take Edge, for example, where the Genesis version won in what is clearly a decisive victory. They called the Genesis version “brilliantly playable” and noted that “everything in it is just about perfect.” The only quibble? “The sound could have been better.” 8 out of 10. The Super NES didn't fare as well, scoring a 6 out of 10. They complained that it was “lacking so much. And what it lacks is so fundamental that you wonder what Capcom are playing at. It's hard to believe that they could mess up Aladdin when they've had so long to work on it.”

One thing you'll find when reading the classic reviews is that most magazines liked both games, but had a strong preference for one or the other. Let's look at Die Hard Game Fan, who genuinely liked the Super NES game. They gave it a score of 89% and raved that “the gameplay is perfect and everything else from the graphics to the music is absolutely top-notch.” Aladdin on the Super NES is indeed good. The only problem is that Die Hard Game Fan felt that the Genesis version was GREAT, and it wasn't even close. Giving the Sega-published game an average score of 97%, this was one of the best-reviewed games of the year. “The development team at Virgin does in three months what most companies couldn't achieve in a year. Aladdin is, without a doubt, the most visually impressive cartridge-based game that I have ever seen.” That is yet another point for the Genesis version.

Even though the scoring system is a little different, GamePro echoed much of what Die Hard Game Fan was saying. With its great handling and catchy tunes, they felt that the Super NES version was a good game that won't disappoint, giving it a 4.5 out of 5. That's a strong score that would normally come out on top in most match-ups, but not when the Genesis game scores a perfect 5 out of 5. Once again, length, graphics and overall depth make the Genesis version a superior game.

One thing that really struck me while reading these classic reviews is how much the critics gushed over the Genesis game. Game Players, for example, called it “one of the best action games ever,” while praising the “graphics and animation, tons of humor and, of course, great action.” They described the Super NES version as “the one WITHOUT Digicel animation.” Now, it's worth noting that they said that the final boss is actually better than the Genesis version, but because it's too short and easy, it scores an 85%, down from the 90% they gave the Sega version.

Now before you accuse these critics of having an American bias, let me bat away that conspiracy theory. If we were to take the insanely long plane ride to Australia, you'd see that Hyper also preferred the Genesis version of Aladdin. Giving it a 94%, they asked, “Why can't all games look this good and play this well?” Two issues later, they gave the Super NES version a 90%, concluding that “it might not look quite as good as the Mega Drive version, but it certainly plays as well.” Once again, the magazine liked both, but preferred Sega's offering.

Hey, remember when I said that the critics loved Sega's Aladdin and said that it was one of the best action games ever made? Computer & Video Games disagreed. Giving it a surprisingly low score of 80%, Amanda argued that it is “perhaps suitable only for young children.” When it came to CVG's Super NES review, Deniz concluded that it's harder than the Genesis version and is “the strongest movie tie-in for a long time.” Wait, didn't every other critic mention something about the Super NES version being too easy? Either way, Computer & Video Games gave the Super NES version of Aladdin an 82%, which means that they are the first magazine to side with Capcom's version.

With a score of six to one, these were the seven English-language magazines I could find that reviewed both versions of Aladdin. If you're thinking that maybe other foreign publications were kinder to the Super NES, I can tell you right now that they weren't. What, you don't believe me? All right, let's do this ...

German magazine Power Play liked both games, but ultimately sided with the Genesis version, giving it an 88%, eight points higher than the 80% they gave the Super NES version. Play Time liked the Genesis version even more, going as high as a 92%. Once again, that's eight points higher than the Super NES game, which they gave an 84%. Still not convinced? That's fine, because here's the generically titled Video Games magazine, which bucked the eight-point spread. Based on the score, they absolutely loved the Genesis game, giving it a 94%, making it one of the highest scoring games of the year. The Super NES version? That was in the middle of the pack with an 82%. And then there's ASM, which is the only magazine I could find to give both games the same score – 92%. That makes it a draw, which feels like the perfect place to end this match-up.

With a score of 10 to 2, it's not even close. The Genesis game is the clear winner. That doesn't mean they were right and you can argue that time has given us greater clarity of each game, but back in the 1990s, it was Sega's Aladdin all the way. Now, what's the next debate we can solve with a magazine match-up?