None, it's architecture is so ridiculously complex that we got a fully functioning PS3 emulator running games in 4K before we got Saturn games running at full speed.
Not true. We had SSF since the early 2000s. It could run the majority of Saturn games without major bugs and near full speed on my Pentium 4 3.2 GHz, more than a decade ago.
You need to be reasonable here. A Saturn Mini would require much more processing power and storage than a Genesis Mini, with the corresponding costs. This is to say nothing of ensuring the emulation is good enough.
True. I was also saying the same thing in older Saturn Mini posts.
However, the same applies for the N64, if not more so. Yet Nintendo was able to emulate it on the good old Wii. Pretty sure even the cheapest soc in existence is more powerful that that.
Of course, the emulation itself was not accurate.... But when was the last time Nintendo (or any other publisher/developer) made an accurate emulator? Even on the Switch, the emulator is less accurate than something like Mupen64plus (let alone Ares).
Publishers don't care about accuracy. I think the only official emulator that was made for retail and it's very accurate was the one used for the Atari 50 release (which btw made it's way on PC and it's now the best Jaguar Emulator available). But other than that, every other emulator is just "good enough" to be able to play some games.
As for the size of the games, that didn't stop the PS1 mini. 5th gen CD games are not that big and most of the time they filled less than 50% of the disk, you can easily fit more than 100 games on a 64GB flash drive (which costs what, 5-10$ these days?) without even compressing them. You can fit 100 games in chd format on a 32GB flash drive. They only need enough space for what, 20-30 games?