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

[WeepingAngels]

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.

So you buy game consoles because of their hardware? I would dare say most people buy game consoles because of their games.

Tech specs = games = generation.

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 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.

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.

 

[Battenberg]

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.

May I ask what provoked this somewhat irrelevant argument? I have pretty much only heard the PS4 and Xbox One being referred to next generation (which for Sony and Microsoft they are) and I certainly haven't heard anyone dismissing the Wii U as part of the 8th generation. In fact I remember there being a fuss when the Wii U was released because it signalled the start of the 8th generatiion. Regardless it's a question of semantics as much as anything and not as related to your 'soulless games' point as you're making out.

The reason that the Wii U has largely been overlooked by the gaming community is (at least in my opinion) nothing to do with the technical specifications of the console but entirely a result of the games that are available. Nintendo has become somewhat stagnant in its creation of new games with an increasing reliance on dragging old characters up again and again for more sequels with little to no variation (particularly in the story department). While 'mascots' were important back in the days of the PS1/ Saturn/ NES era Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft are well established in the world of gaming now and don't (/shouldn't) need to rely on these gimmicks. No doubt there is an element of console power influencing which console the best developers go with but it certainly isn't the be-all and end-all (e.g. Insomniac have moved to the less powerful Xbox One for the next generation). The PS2 vs. Xbox vs. Gamecube battle highlights this excellently. Of the three the PS2 was certainly not the most powerful, with many even arguing it was the weakest of the three, but the PS2 proved the most popular both with developers and customers.

I absolutely agree that there is a worrying level of stagnation in the games industry at the moment where AAA titles are far too conerned with graphics to the point that gameplay and story are constantly taking a backseat. I also think that Nintendo are being given a get out of jail free card by far to many gamers purely because their consoles are weaker and this somehow gives them some kind of divine righteousness in this argument that makes them untouchable. To give a practical example let's take two recent releases from two different consoles- The Last of Us (PS3), and Pikmin 3 (Wii U) and knock them back to the PS2/ Gamecube era (graphically speaking). With Pikmin 3 you'd get Pikmin 1 (seriously, just watch gameplay videos side by side) but with Last of Us you still have solid characters, a zombie story with a twist, innovative gameplay, gameplay that is actually challenging, and some of the best voice acting I've heard in this generation of games; all-in-all personally I think if this game had been released for the PS2 (within the confines of the PS2's processing ability) it would be in the same league as resident evil 4. If you take it back even further to a 16 bit game I imagine you'd basically have Super Mario for Pikmin, The Last of Us still has an interesting and original enough story that it would still be compelling to play. And it's not even like overall the gameplay of the Last of Us required a huge amount more computational power than Pikmin 3 (in fact it actually used half the RAM Pikmin 3 required).

In short Nintendo has not evolved with the gaming market. In particular it hasn't acknowledged that its target market is much older now than it was in the days of the original gameboy. As a result its exclusives just aren't good enough to make it viable competition against the PS3 and 360, let alone the upcoming PS4 and Xbox One. That is one of teh biggest reasons why it is getting overlooked by gamers (although any gamer worth their salt still knows which console generation it belongs to). And that's saying nothing about the somewhat pointless second screen/ controller that they forced as part of the console that really brings very little to gameplay.

Tl;dr - No one is pretending the Wii U isn't part of the eight generation but it is getting overlooked by gamers because Nintendo hasn't kept up with the game industry at all. Also while I agree the game industry is getting a bit soulless in places Nintendo is certainly not exempt from this problem and, in my opionion, is actually one of the worst offenders for not bringin innovation to new games.

 

[Xdeser2]

...Because the Wii U isn't taken seriously.

Honestly, look. It was launched with mostly shoddily done ports from other systems, its specs are only slightly higher than the 360, and its line up to date is just terrible.

Looking at the support that both the PS4 and Xbox One have, as well as their system specs and launch titles, the Wii U is looking to be lacking really badly at the moment.

That's not to say that the Wii U will never have success, hell, it only took Wii Sports for the original Wii to sell like cancer-curing hotcakes, so who knows what will happen in the future.

 

[Bad Jim]

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?

Extra power does give the developer more options. Minecraft, for example, is impossible on the PS2/Xbox due to the lack of RAM and the absence of a hard disk. But it does exist on the 360, and it could be done on the PS3.

Also, things that can be done on one generation with lots of cheap tricks and artificial restrictions can often be done very simply on the next generation, with no silly tricks complicating the code and no artificial restrictions. Open worlds, for example, existed on previous gen consoles, but the lack of polygons was quite a problem, as you had to restrict the view distance, or limit yourself to about 100 polygons per acre, or have horrible pop-in with the land visibly deforming as you ran through it. But they've flourished this gen, as simply having a larger polygon budget makes these issues much easier to deal with.

It's hard to say exactly what the next gen will bring us, but we could possibly get fully destructable environments. A real military tactic is to use explosives to make your own doorway, rather risk the existing door. Not only does that sound kind of fun, but it opens up a lot of interesting tactical possibilities. Maybe we'll see a Minecraft with physics, where dynamite can make a mountain topple rather than excavating a hole and leaving rock some suspended in the air.

 

[WeepingAngels]

...Because the Wii U isn't taken seriously.

Honestly, look. It was launched with mostly shoddily done ports from other systems, its specs are only slightly higher than the 360, and its line up to date is just terrible.

Looking at the support that both the PS4 and Xbox One have, as well as their system specs and launch titles, the Wii U is looking to be lacking really badly at the moment.

That's not to say that the Wii U will never have success, hell, it only took Wii Sports for the original Wii to sell like cancer-curing hotcakes, so who knows what will happen in the future.

Wii took off from the beginning. It launched with it's cancer-curing hotcakes. It won't happen with Wii U but it is still an 8th generation console.

 

[Denamic]

Okay, so it's an 8th gen console. Hell, why not 10th gen while we're at it? Now what?

 

[gavinmcinns]

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.

So you buy game consoles because of their hardware? I would dare say most people buy game consoles because of their games.

he didn't say that, you said that. Besides its not like the Wii u has any games or ever will. Nintendo puts out a game a generation. They've stalled out. They're out of ideas. Just fire everybody and let some new blood call the shots.

 

[gavinmcinns]

Okay, so it's an 8th gen console. Hell, why not 10th gen while we're at it? Now what?

exactly. Its tied for the most uninteresting conversation ever, right next to what color socks Stevie wonder is wearing. Its red damnit

 

[WeepingAngels]

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.

So you buy game consoles because of their hardware? I would dare say most people buy game consoles because of their games.

he didn't say that, you said that. Besides its not like the Wii u has any games or ever will. Nintendo puts out a game a generation. They've stalled out. They're out of ideas. Just fire everybody and let some new blood call the shots.

He did say that. He made a clear distinction between buying the console and buying the games.

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.

You see where he separated the buying of hardware and the buying of games? He gave the impression that he goes out on day one and buys the console because he like the hardware and only later does he worry about what games are available for it.

...................

Okay, so it's an 8th gen console. Hell, why not 10th gen while we're at it? Now what?

exactly. Its tied for the most uninteresting conversation ever, right next to what color socks Stevie wonder is wearing. Its red damnit

It sucks when people are forced to post in topics that don't interest them. Damn Escapist and their rules!

 

[Mothhive]

In terms of technology, a generation is defined as "a specified stage of development in manufacture, usually implying improvement". The Wii U was not an improvement over the 7th generation consoles, and therefore belongs to that generation.

Extreme example here, but if someone were to manufacture a fork that has the same shape and serve the same function as the common forks we've been using for years, could they claim that they are next gen forks simply because they are newer? No, that would be fucking ridiculous and people would laugh at them.

Next gen forks would be something like this:

 

[WeepingAngels]

In terms of technology, a generation is defined as "a specified stage of development in manufacture, usually implying improvement". The Wii U was not an improvement over the 7th generation consoles, and therefore belongs to that generation.

Wii U is an improvement over Wii. Wii was an improvement over Gamecube. Gamecube was an improvement over N64 and so on.

Is it written somewhere that they must exceed their competitions technology by a certain percentage?

 

[EyeReaper]

It's kinda funny, you know. PC gamers trumpet around their compy specs, and console gamers go "PC master race boo" but then the Wii u gets brought up, and what do the xbox/playstation gamers bring up? specs. I can't be the only one who notices this, am I?

In response to the original question, I didn't realize it wasn't considered next gen. Yahtzee considered it gen. 8 in his console rundown.(seen here: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/7417-Next-Gen-Buyers-Guide)
If he, of all people, can say the wii u is next gen, really everybody should.

 

[Ruzinus]

When did console generations begin being defined by tech specs?

In 1996 when Nintendo named its next gen console the Nintendo 64 to try and make it seem better than the Playstation.

 

[Mothhive]

In terms of technology, a generation is defined as "a specified stage of development in manufacture, usually implying improvement". The Wii U was not an improvement over the 7th generation consoles, and therefore belongs to that generation.

Wii U is an improvement over Wii. Wii was an improvement over Gamecube. Gamecube was an improvement over N64 and so on.

Is it written somewhere that they must exceed their competitions technology by a certain percentage?

It was not an improvement over currently available technology, thus, not a new generation.

I'll go back to my ridiculous fork example if you like, and ask whether you think a fork is next gen, even if it's a regular borning metal fork like all the others out there, simply because the person that made it used to make wooden forks?

 

[WeepingAngels]

When did console generations begin being defined by tech specs?

In 1996 when Nintendo named its next gen console the Nintendo 64 to try and make it seem better than the Playstation.

...or before that when Sega put 16 BIT on the front of the Genesis? We learned that bits aren't really that big of a thing before N64 ever came out. Atleast I did. Can you even tell me what advantage 64 bit had over the 32 bit Playstation or the 32 bit PC?

 

[WeepingAngels]

It's kinda funny, you know. PC gamers trumpet around their compy specs, and console gamers go "PC master race boo" but then the Wii u gets brought up, and what do the xbox/playstation gamers bring up? specs. I can't be the only one who notices this, am I?

I never thought about it before but you are right.

In response to the original question, I didn't realize it wasn't considered next gen. Yahtzee considered it gen. 8 in his console rundown.(seen here: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/7417-Next-Gen-Buyers-Guide)
If he, of all people, can say the wii u is next gen, really everybody should.

Yahtzee is just being logical. The people being radical are the ones that suggest generations should now be defined by specs. I wonder if those people considered PC to be 8th gen a few years back.

 

[WeepingAngels]

In terms of technology, a generation is defined as "a specified stage of development in manufacture, usually implying improvement". The Wii U was not an improvement over the 7th generation consoles, and therefore belongs to that generation.

Wii U is an improvement over Wii. Wii was an improvement over Gamecube. Gamecube was an improvement over N64 and so on.

Is it written somewhere that they must exceed their competitions technology by a certain percentage?

It was not an improvement over currently available technology, thus, not a new generation.

I'll go back to my ridiculous fork example if you like, and ask whether you think a fork is next gen, even if it's a regular borning metal fork like all the others out there, simply because the person that made it used to make wooden forks?

Your fork example doesn't really work because forks don't have generations, atleast not yet.

Oh so now instead of having better tech than their competition, they must also improve over currently available technology like PC technology?

 

[6urk17s]

The people being radical are the ones that suggest generations should now be defined by specs. I wonder if those people considered PC to be 8th gen a few years back.

No, because PC is modular. Maybe you could divide PC in generations depending on the average RAM at the time.
You can, however, have generations for video cards, motherboards, processors e.c.t.

 

[Maze1125]

In terms of technology, a generation is defined as "a specified stage of development in manufacture, usually implying improvement". The Wii U was not an improvement over the 7th generation consoles, and therefore belongs to that generation.

Do you know what the word "usually" means?
It means, most of the time, but not always.
As in, there are exceptions. Such as, for example, the Wii U.

 

[Mothhive]

In terms of technology, a generation is defined as "a specified stage of development in manufacture, usually implying improvement". The Wii U was not an improvement over the 7th generation consoles, and therefore belongs to that generation.

Wii U is an improvement over Wii. Wii was an improvement over Gamecube. Gamecube was an improvement over N64 and so on.

Is it written somewhere that they must exceed their competitions technology by a certain percentage?

It was not an improvement over currently available technology, thus, not a new generation.

I'll go back to my ridiculous fork example if you like, and ask whether you think a fork is next gen, even if it's a regular borning metal fork like all the others out there, simply because the person that made it used to make wooden forks?

Your fork example doesn't really work because forks don't have generations, atleast not yet.

Oh so now instead of having better tech than their competition, they must also improve over currently available technology like PC technology?

I'm aware forks aren't considered to have generations, but I was trying to give a humorous example that was easy to understand.

As for PCs, we're talking about console generations, so PCs don't enter into it (which is a good thing because they are much harder to quantify as they are in a constant state of improvement). So yes, new generations have to be a vast improvement over previous generations. Nintendo may have improved on their previous console, so it would be fair to say it's a new generation of Nintendo Console, but they have merely caught up to the 7th gen consoles with the Wii U, so they belong to that generation.

I like how insistent you are that large technical improvement is an arbitrary way to gauge a console generation, when your criteria, time, is even more arbitrary. Is the Xbox One 9th generation because it comes out after the 8th Gen PS4?