By late 1995, feedback to the add-on had soured. In its 1996 Buyer's Guide, "Electronic Gaming Monthly"'s four reviewers scored the add-on 3, 3, 3, and 2 out of 10, criticizing the game library and Sega's abandonment of the system in favor of the Saturn. A review in "Next Generation" panned the 32X for its weak polygon processing, the tendency of developers to show off its capabilities with garishly colored games, and its apparent function as "simply a way of grabbing extra 1994 mind and market share while waiting for Saturn". The review gave it one out of five stars. "Game Players" assessed it as so much less powerful than the Saturn and PlayStation that its lower price could not be considered an enticement, and said that the vast majority of its games could have been done just as well on the Super NES. Additionally commenting that both first party and third party software support had been weak, they concluded, "The lack of support good games, and the release of Saturn make the 32X a system that never was."