The 8th generation arrived.....last year.
- Thread starter KazeAizen
- Start date
Recommended Videos
In most ways you compare current consoles to each other, and determine which of those current consoles are the best during any period of time.
In this case the three primary consoles available right now are the Wii U, PS3 and Xbox 360. They are all fairly close in power and can play the same games pretty much. 3rd party games can be played on all 3 systems, so I would say they are all part of the same generation.
Now when the Ps4 and Xbox Bone come out....things will change again. I would not put the Wii U in the same generation as them if it can not run the same games (3rd party games). In theory at least, it won't have the power to run the newer games so...you might as well call it part of the 7th generation basically.
In reality...it will be part of the 8th generation of games....but not until another generation actually starts. It doesn't push the envelope of power enough to start a new generation on it's own....it just pretty much catches up to the rest. That being said, once a new generation starts, the Wii U will still be in contention and will still get people to buy both systems and new games...so it will still be a viable system in the 8th generation.
It just can't start a new generation itself because it's not capable of running games that other systems (from the 7th gen) can not run. If it's not better then other systems in the current generation, it certainly can't start a new one.
So that is why the 8th generation hasn't started. It will start in november when the new systems start being sold, and I guess specifically once a game is sold that can not currently be run on current gen systems (which considering so many games are being made/sold for both Ps3 and PS4 etc...that may be awhile longer!!).
In this case the three primary consoles available right now are the Wii U, PS3 and Xbox 360. They are all fairly close in power and can play the same games pretty much. 3rd party games can be played on all 3 systems, so I would say they are all part of the same generation.
Now when the Ps4 and Xbox Bone come out....things will change again. I would not put the Wii U in the same generation as them if it can not run the same games (3rd party games). In theory at least, it won't have the power to run the newer games so...you might as well call it part of the 7th generation basically.
In reality...it will be part of the 8th generation of games....but not until another generation actually starts. It doesn't push the envelope of power enough to start a new generation on it's own....it just pretty much catches up to the rest. That being said, once a new generation starts, the Wii U will still be in contention and will still get people to buy both systems and new games...so it will still be a viable system in the 8th generation.
It just can't start a new generation itself because it's not capable of running games that other systems (from the 7th gen) can not run. If it's not better then other systems in the current generation, it certainly can't start a new one.
So that is why the 8th generation hasn't started. It will start in november when the new systems start being sold, and I guess specifically once a game is sold that can not currently be run on current gen systems (which considering so many games are being made/sold for both Ps3 and PS4 etc...that may be awhile longer!!).
The same argument can be applied to pretty much any console. Why develop for the Xbox One when the PlayStation 4 version will look so much better? Tech specs basically tell us what the game is capable of looking like, not necessarily what it will be like or what is is capable of in terms of gameplay, world, story etc. Pushing the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and Wii to their limits have brought us to what, exactly? Shiny games with mechanics which were more likely to be possible in 2006 or even the previous generation?Bad Jim said:
For the record, I don't intend on getting a Wii U until later on even if it does have one or two games I like the look of now.
Edit: Perhaps a better point would have been the fact that both the Wii and Wii U were overlooked because of how hard it is to develop games on them.
Because it didnt have a tech jump since Nintendo has been steadily tinkering with mechanic ideas for years now. They're kind of running a different race now, least to my eyes.KazeAizen said:
Same. If you don't think specs matter in determining what a "gen" is the why do you care in the first place? It hardly matters, its just a title and Nintendo obviously doesn't care about comparing to other companiesloc978 said:
As for graphics vs games, I don't see where all the butt hurt is coming from. We judge games by their content, not their graphics and we judge devices by their specs because that's what we buy them for. With the unique case of consoles, we can also judge by their games due to exclusives which is the only reason Nintendo is still relevant. Its a fine reason, I don't hate exclusives but it basically shows the console probably won't offer anything better than the ps4, XB1, and pc's other than their games which I stopped caring about a while ago. Sure Watch Dogs and all that are being ported to it now, but I remember that Call of Duty World at War also launched on the Wii when it first came out
Its the equivalent of Nintendo finally coming out with a 720p tv when Microsoft and Sony are moving onto 1080p and arguing "its not about the picture quality, its the shows on them that matter!" Uh yeah, but I'd still rather watch them in HD
I consider the Wii U as "next gen" because it's Nintendo's next gen. If it was a matter of graphical power, why was the Wii lumped in with the PS3 and 360?
I agree Nintendo operates much differently compared to the other two, but whether they like it or not, Sony and Microsoft are still competition. There wouldn't be this discussion if the PS4 was 2x stronger than the Xbox One, it would still be the next gen, but one would be stronger than the other two. Just because one is found lacking and the other two are around the same power level, it doesn't change the fact that it's Nintendo's "next gen."
We also don't seem to have this discussion when it comes to handhelds, the Vita is a lot stronger than the 3DS like the PSP compared to the DS before. Yet they are considered being in the same generation of handhelds, couldn't that logic extend to consoles?
I agree Nintendo operates much differently compared to the other two, but whether they like it or not, Sony and Microsoft are still competition. There wouldn't be this discussion if the PS4 was 2x stronger than the Xbox One, it would still be the next gen, but one would be stronger than the other two. Just because one is found lacking and the other two are around the same power level, it doesn't change the fact that it's Nintendo's "next gen."
We also don't seem to have this discussion when it comes to handhelds, the Vita is a lot stronger than the 3DS like the PSP compared to the DS before. Yet they are considered being in the same generation of handhelds, couldn't that logic extend to consoles?
'Next gen' is where the focus of (third party) developers will be when new consoles come out. And unfortunately that is not in favor of the WiiU. Had the WiiU surprised us with amazing and exclusive software that you couldn't experience anywhere else than sure, WiiU would have been next gen. Why not. Next gen is the next big thing, not just in terms of processing power but also in terms of innovation, creativity and production values. Even if there was an amazing HD Zelda or Metroid on the WiiU it would have something to compete with but as it stands now it just has....nothing.
Generations are meaningful, the Wii-U isn't, outside of Nintendo fans it's mostly been ignored.
Now that game designers aren't limited to the paltry specs of the PS3 and 360 we can finally see new growth across the board in graphics, design, space, sure some people say specs don't matter but they just do.
With the Wii-U we get more Mario and company, a few good games still constrained to the shitty specs of last generation, and some shovelware, hardly something to care about least of which call a generation.
Now that game designers aren't limited to the paltry specs of the PS3 and 360 we can finally see new growth across the board in graphics, design, space, sure some people say specs don't matter but they just do.
With the Wii-U we get more Mario and company, a few good games still constrained to the shitty specs of last generation, and some shovelware, hardly something to care about least of which call a generation.
It would be a very different situation if one was more powerful than the other two. In that case, that console would be the odd one out and third-party developers would rather make games that all 3 could run, rather than the one powerful console (unless it becomes extremely popular).Hero of Lime said:
In this case, you have two console of pretty much equal hardware, and one console that lags behind one generation in terms of technology. Sure, developers could just make games of 7th generation quality for all 3 consoles and not make use of the extra processing power, but there's competition to think about.
Wii U didn't have as big of leap in hardware and it lacked a ton of new games (at launch, that has changed since then).
Both of which are irrelevant because Generations are a measure of time, not tech level.
Both of which are irrelevant because Generations are a measure of time, not tech level.
So you buy game consoles because of their hardware? I would dare say most people buy game consoles because of their games.Bad Jim said:
I for one have yet to see a single Wii U on sale in Argentina. On the other hand, you bet you life PS4s and Xbones will be all over the market once they come out. So not a lot of people give a fuck about the Wii U. I think its target audience is very marginal.
You know what, I do get sick of the idea that a system has to have "multi-platform AAA titles" to be considered a "real" system. Fuck that, I say good show Nintendo, keep doing things differently than everyone else. Whether it works or not at least you're not being led around by the AAA marketeers. Sure there "are" some multi-platform releases, but what does it matter? No one buys Nintendo for their *ahem* "great 3rd party games".
The WiiU doesn't count as an 8th gen console because most if not all 8th gen games, that aren't Nintendo 1st party software, that I care about can't be run on the thing. Nothing against the WiiU, it is what it is and it's good at being that. However it's not by any means a competitor for the PS4 or Xbone.
Third party multiplat games aren't what defines competition. Exclusives come closer to defining competition than third party multiplat games but Call of Duty 35 will be the same on both the PS4 and the One whereas exclusives are different by nature.XX Y XY said:
I'm sorry if that didn't make sense, I am having trouble translating my thought into words.
This whole thread is moronic. Console "generations" aren't a question of time, AAA games that exist on all of them nor technical specifications. They're a question of which consoles compete against each other for sales.
The only question to ask, when deciding if the Wii U is 8th generation or not, is to ask if the Wii U is going to be competing for sales against the PS4 and XBone. Which it very clearly is. You may argue that it's not going to be very successful, but that doesn't change the fact that it is trying to compete.
Edit: Although, in turn, that does mean it can be argued that the 8th generation doesn't start until at least one of the XBone or PS4 arrives, as there can be no competition until there are at least two competitors.
The only question to ask, when deciding if the Wii U is 8th generation or not, is to ask if the Wii U is going to be competing for sales against the PS4 and XBone. Which it very clearly is. You may argue that it's not going to be very successful, but that doesn't change the fact that it is trying to compete.
Edit: Although, in turn, that does mean it can be argued that the 8th generation doesn't start until at least one of the XBone or PS4 arrives, as there can be no competition until there are at least two competitors.
Tech specs = games = generation.WeepingAngels said:
PS4 & XBOne are more or less equally powerful and therefore they can play all any 8th generation designed games (though games will be exclusive and stuff, but ether console is technically powerful enough to play any game).
And obviously the PC will be able to play all 8th generation designed games too, and PC games will also upgrade to 8th generation games themselves now that the consoles have started.
The Wii U on the other hand is still on 360 and PS3 comparable level of tach spec, therefore it cannot play the general 8th generation of games. All they can play is their own custom games and lesser/downgraded versions of 8th generation of games.
Technically speaking Nintendo is a generation behind the Wii was more on par with PS2/Xbox and the Wii U is on par with 360/PS3. However that said with their gimmicks and their own games they have gotten their kiddy/mommy market locked down and are doing OK regardless.
On the tech specs argument, I could point you to the 3DS and the Vita.Angelous Wang said:
Anyway, the 360, PS3 and PC could run (insert Mario or Zelda game) but it didn't happen. It's not about what hardware is capable of as much as it's about what games will be made/ported to said hardware.
Did you know that the PS2 was the weakest console of that gen (once the Dreamcast bowed out)? The Gamecube was faster than the PS2 and the Wii is twice as fast as the Gamecube so let's stop pretending that the Wii and the PS2 are even close where specs are concerned. The Wii was close to the original Xbox specs though.
Technically speaking, you are correct, Nintendo is a generation behind but generations aren't defined by hardware specs.