The 8th generation arrived.....last year.

[KazeAizen]

So this is really eating at me. Why can't people just admit that the 8th generation of games started last year with the Wii U? I mean seriously it seems that to me people said the Wii U doesn't count as an 8th gen consoles but rather a 7.5 gen consoles because its specs are maybe just barely better then the PS3 and 360's. Are tech specs really so important and vital to your gaming experience now that when one piece of hardware doesn't meet some arbitrary bar it is automatically excluded from current gen talk?

When did console generations begin being defined by tech specs? Also if those are so freaking important to everyone I kind of feel sad about gamings future. Oh sure the games will look phenomenal and such but when people start talking more about the processing power and less about the consoles mascots in terms who is better that just seems utterly soulless to me and that's the last thing I want gaming competition to turn into. Soulless arguements of which consoles has the biggest metaphorical dick. I'd like to see talk more along the lines of who is the bigger badass. Bayonetta or that guy from Ryse who is pretty much Kratos light.

 

[Doom972]

The WiiU's specs mean that most multi-platform next-gen titles won't get released for it. The Wii didn't get some of the most popular multi-platform games of the last generation (Skyrim, Mass Effect 3, XCOM: Enemy Unknown, etc), and the same will happen with the WiiU. Notice that most of the WiiU's third-party games are actually 7th gen ports.

 

[Bad Jim]

When did console generations begin being defined by tech specs?

What's wrong with looking at tech specs? We are buying hardware. We want to know what that hardware is capable of. We'll worry about which games are good when we are buying games.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

because....um...uh...because Nintendo doesn't count? I've given up on this point; if people want to continue this seven-year-long tantrum against Nintendo then I say let them. If they wanna reiterate boring specs because it makes them feel less insecure then go ahead. It reminds me of what Iwata said years ago in that the SECOND people start doing that then gaming is in trouble. I just think it's funny how the power bump from one generation to the next is getting so small now that instead of devs just SHOWING us the difference they have to TELL us the difference. If devs were whining about a lack of power before I shudder to think how they're going to act a few years from now.

 

[MetalDooley]

When did console generations begin being defined by tech specs?

Last gen apparently.There was such a clear difference in power between the Wii and 360/PS3 that people began to say that Nintendo weren't in the same generation as their competitors and that has carried over into this gen.It's all nonsense especially as generation refers to a period of time not power.Anyone who talks about "next-gen" in relation to power is making about as much sense as Han Solo when he uses parsecs as a unit of time

 

[Miss G.]

To me, next gen started to refer to when all the console makers release their product around the same time, when it should be the next iteration of an individual company's hardware. e.g The iPod has a lot of generations - for it, that doesn't mean if a brand new company should get into making a similar product, that product should be considered as weak for whatever #gen Apple is on instead of simply their own first gen. By that logic Sony and Nintendo have more gens than Microsoft, so not counting slim/slightly updated versions of the same system, Nintendo would be the most current, Sony in second and Microsoft dead last since they only had the Xbox and the 360.

TL;DR The next gen for Nintendo is simply the next console after their previous one, just like with virtually everything else in life.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

When did console generations begin being defined by tech specs?

Last gen apparently.There was such a clear difference in power between the Wii and 360/PS3 that people began to say that Nintendo weren't in the same generation as their competitors and that has carried over into this gen.It's all nonsense especially as generation refers to a period of time not power.Anyone who talks about "next-gen" in relation to power is making about as much sense as Han Solo when he uses parsecs as a unit of time

I wouldn't say it's total nonsense. Generations of /people/ are about time, but with computer and game hardware it usually is more about power than anything else. What's more, Nintendo themselves didn't consider the Wii to be in competition with the PS3 or 360, they were just kind of doing their own thing and making money hand over fist. The WiiU is a continuation of that strategy.

But in all seriousness, there's almost as good an argument that the Wii is really a sixth gen console as there is that the PSOne or PS2 slim were part of the same generation as the original models[footnote]Because both hardware revisions, especially the PSOne, came right at the end of the lifecycle and were intended as a budget option to share shelf space with its successor[/footnote], or for an even more apt comparison, the Atari 2600 JR, which was a repackaged Atari VCS that hit the market in 1985 to compete with the NES and to act as a budget alternative to the 7800, was still a second gen system despite launching in the third gen and sticking around until the start of the fourth gen.

 

[Shadowstar38]

Simplest answer I can think of, no one cares about Nintendo and the next gen starts when the systems people actually want come out.

 

[Evonisia]

I hate that people won't admit that it's started. I think it has started but I personally don't think a Generation should be considered 'this' generation until all the consoles are out for it.

Though mostly I just see "The Wii U isn't a current gen console. Nintendo sucks and it is barely any more powerful than the 360 or the PS3". The Eight Generation has started but until the PS4 and Xbox One are out I'm not going to say that the Eighth is "this" gen.

 

[Evonisia]

When did console generations begin being defined by tech specs?

What's wrong with looking at tech specs? We are buying hardware. We want to know what that hardware is capable of. We'll worry about which games are good when we are buying games.

Because consoles provide our games. I don't care if the GB of "x" is bigger or is capable of making cleavage shine in darkness, if it doesn't have games I'd like to play I'm not going to pick it up.

 

[Ed130 The Vanguard]

Because it can't run next gen games without any sort of downgrade to theequlivant of current gen hardware?

Console generations have always been a a little nebulous, but the combination of timin, lack of power compared to the upcoming next-gen, and lack of intrest have pushed the WiiU out of the running.

Unless it pulls a Wii and rofl-stomps the PS4 and Xbone, its going to stay 7.5 gen.

 

[Maximum Bert]

I find it odd that Nintendo have got themselves in this situation to begin with many people I know now look at them completely differently and have done since the Wii came out and to be honest a lot of them have outright just written off Nintendo as worthy of their time.

Next Gen means little and whether its acknowledged as a next gen console or not thats the least of its worries, they really have a serious image problem now when it comes to home consoles that will take some shifting.

 

[LetalisK]

Well, I consider WiiU part of the next generation. Not a robust and thriving part of it, but still part of it. Considering specs over release period seems backwards to me. Would that make the Ouya what...2nd gen? 1st? No, compare the console to its contemporaries.

 

[number2301]

When did console generations begin being defined by tech specs?

Seriously? Until recently the whole concept of generations was literally defined by 8 bit, 16 bit, and 32 bit. It has always been that way, otherwise the whole generation thing becomes meaningless. The Wii U isn't 8th gen because it is basically the same as the 7th gen stuff.

If you want to take that line, why didn't the 8th gen start with the XBox elite? That was a new console from Microsoft, with revised hardware, different design etc.

Tech specs are important, and they are important because they allow developers to make bigger worlds, new experiences, better AI etc. It isn't just about graphics.

And I'm really not that inclined to take the word of someone from Nintendo as particularly valuable in the current market. They hit gold with the Wii, as in, they made a tonne of money, but became completely irrelevant pretty quickly. The Wii U isn't relevant now, and it won't be in the 8th gen.

 

[Saltyk]

Well, technically, the WiiU is the same generation of the PS4 and Xbonebuyourgamesbecauseweownyoursouldyoulousyfuck. But I don't think many would consider it as such. Largely because many of its games are PS3 and 360 ports. WiiU probably won't be able to play most third party games that will be on the PS4 or Xboxhadsexwithyourgirlfriendsodealwithit, which is a problem. It's not good when "multiplatform" doesn't include your system as a rule. And when it does, the game is generally the worst version of said game.

These facts make the WiiU seem less like an early entry into the next generation and more like a very late entry in the current generation. Even if it isn't true.
Let me put it this way. If I gave you a brand new computer with the specs of a 1995 computer, would you consider it to be new?

 

[generals3]

Last gen apparently.There was such a clear difference in power between the Wii and 360/PS3 that people began to say that Nintendo weren't in the same generation as their competitors and that has carried over into this gen.It's all nonsense especially as generation refers to a period of time not power.Anyone who talks about "next-gen" in relation to power is making about as much sense as Han Solo when he uses parsecs as a unit of time

Euhm, no. Specs is the most relevant aspect to "generation". If after the release of the PS4 they release a PS4 slim version would you label it as a gen 9 console? After all, it is different and came afterwards in time. But I think we can all agree that would be silly. Nuclear Reactors also clearly link their "generation" label to specs. Otherwise there would be no reason why Generation III+ reactors aren't called Gen IV reactors and Gen IV reactors Gen V. But since Gen III+ reactors aren't a big improvement over Gen III reactors they called it Gen III+.

 

[Bad Jim]

When did console generations begin being defined by tech specs?

What's wrong with looking at tech specs? We are buying hardware. We want to know what that hardware is capable of. We'll worry about which games are good when we are buying games.

Because consoles provide our games. I don't care if the GB of "x" is bigger or is capable of making cleavage shine in darkness, if it doesn't have games I'd like to play I'm not going to pick it up.

But the games haven't been made yet. Most of them haven't even been imagined. Unless you have the money to just buy all consoles, it's silly to just buy a WiiU on the strength of one or two decent games. What is it going to look like next year?

Tech specs, on the other hand, are known quantities. We don't know exactly what they'll look like once pushed to the limit, but it's safe to say that most cross platform games that target the WiiU will look much better on the PS4 or xbone. It's also likely that many impressive looking games won't target the WiiU at all, simply because it isn't powerful enough.

 

[skywolfblue]

Last gen apparently.There was such a clear difference in power between the Wii and 360/PS3 that people began to say that Nintendo weren't in the same generation as their competitors and that has carried over into this gen.It's all nonsense especially as generation refers to a period of time not power.Anyone who talks about "next-gen" in relation to power is making about as much sense as Han Solo when he uses parsecs as a unit of time

Euhm, no. Specs is the most relevant aspect to "generation". If after the release of the PS4 they release a PS4 slim version would you label it as a gen 9 console? After all, it is different and came afterwards in time. But I think we can all agree that would be silly. Nuclear Reactors also clearly link their "generation" label to specs. Otherwise there would be no reason why Generation III+ reactors aren't called Gen IV reactors and Gen IV reactors Gen V. But since Gen III+ reactors aren't a big improvement over Gen III reactors they called it Gen III+.

I agree with this. If each new console version constituted a generation, generation numbers would switch so fast that we'd have a hard time keeping track. Specs are a pretty decent metric for defining console generations.

So this is really eating at me. Why can't people just admit that the 8th generation of games started last year with the Wii U? I mean seriously it seems that to me people said the Wii U doesn't count as an 8th gen consoles but rather a 7.5 gen consoles because its specs are maybe just barely better then the PS3 and 360's. Are tech specs really so important and vital to your gaming experience now that when one piece of hardware doesn't meet some arbitrary bar it is automatically excluded from current gen talk?

Why is it important that it be labeled as 8th gen instead of 7.5 gen? A label change isn't going to make the WiiU more powerful, it's not going to magically get more 3rd parties to develop for it. A label change isn't going to make people who don't like the WiiU suddenly adopt it.

There's been plenty of talk about the WiiU, good and bad. So it's not like people aren't discussing it.

 

[loc978]

...I fail to see why defining which "generation" a console is part of matters. I'll take my "boring tech specs" over boring market analysis any time. Still looking forward to the day when hardware is homogenized enough that a "console" is no longer a thing. We're coming up on streaming everything from a house computer to every device in the house... and you can bet your ass your house computer will be built on the latest iteration of x86 architecture.