So, by your logic, the Xbox 360 was 6th Gen then? Or does the Xbox 360 get a pass because its Microsoft? The Wii U is part of this generation. Get. Over. It.Mothhive said:So now it's dependant on who the console competes with for sales which defines which generation it is? Hasn't the Wii U already been competing with (and losing to) the 360 and the PS3 for the past year? So surely that makes it 7th Gen? Also, if it struggles to compete with the other 7th Gen consoles, it certainly won't be able to compete with the 8th Gen consoles. And if it doesn't compete with them, then it's not part of that generation, right?WeepingAngels said:Time has always been the defining factor and it is the case here too. The Wii competed against 7th gen consoles and it won in terms of sales. The Wii was not competing against 6th gen consoles even though it was close to the specs of the Xbox. It makes no sense that you think the Wii U will be competing against 7th gen consoles too.Mothhive said:I'm aware forks aren't considered to have generations, but I was trying to give a humorous example that was easy to understand.WeepingAngels said:Your fork example doesn't really work because forks don't have generations, atleast not yet.Mothhive said:It was not an improvement over currently available technology, thus, not a new generation.WeepingAngels said:Wii U is an improvement over Wii. Wii was an improvement over Gamecube. Gamecube was an improvement over N64 and so on.Mothhive said: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.
Is it written somewhere that they must exceed their competitions technology by a certain percentage?
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?
Oh so now instead of having better tech than their competition, they must also improve over currently available technology like PC technology?
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?
Your analogy made me laugh, but I can still improve upon it.Guitarmasterx7 said:Think of it this way. You're a buxom young lady at the beach and the three companies are guys at trying to catch your eye. Microsoft and Sony are chiseled tan hunks of men letting the sun rays glisten off of their perfect washboard abs as they come out of the water in slow motion. Nintendo is the scrawny pasty guy on the shore, introspectively staring off into the horizon and painting a picture of the sea.
Heh, I was going to suggest that too. The shorter your flight path, the more dangerous it is, the bigger your balls, the more bragging rights you get. Though I'm not sure how long a parsec actually is or what the Kessel Run actually looks like to determine if 12 parsecs is an appropriate distance for such a run.teebeeohh said:part of the Kessel run moves you close to a cluster of black holes, the closer you fly to that the shorter the route you have to take.MetalDooley said: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
If Nintendo did that then we might actually consider them next gen. Defend them all you like, Nintendo has almost no third party support for the very reasons espoused in this thread. They are too far behind the curve technologically for Moore's law to even remotely apply to them. You look forward to the next Mario, Zelda, or Metroid. I'll stick to my PC, which IS upgradeable, and the true next gen consoles that at least attempt to keep up with current technological trends for higher graphic fidelity, more interative environments, and overall increased immersion. I am looking forward to the next 2 years of gaming simply because major developers will not feel nearly so bottlenecked whenever a console port of a PC game is requested.nima55 said:I get the feeling that if say 4 E3s from now Nintendo introduced a box with 100gb of ram, 1 TB of storage space, a gpu that could calculate pi to the last digit and it only cost a hundred bucks, people would still dismiss it.
My dad, because I'm a little bit fucked up that way. Wait...veloper said:Your analogy made me laugh, but I can still improve upon it.Guitarmasterx7 said:Think of it this way. You're a buxom young lady at the beach and the three companies are guys at trying to catch your eye. Microsoft and Sony are chiseled tan hunks of men letting the sun rays glisten off of their perfect washboard abs as they come out of the water in slow motion. Nintendo is the scrawny pasty guy on the shore, introspectively staring off into the horizon and painting a picture of the sea.
Again you're a young lady at the beach, only the PS3 and 360 are two 17 year old jocks, wrestling with eachother, while the wii, an 11 year old kid, is building a sand castle. The PC is your middle aged dad. Who will you date and why?
That's correct. And do you also know why?Guitarmasterx7 said:My dad, because I'm a little bit fucked up that way. Wait...veloper said:Your analogy made me laugh, but I can still improve upon it.Guitarmasterx7 said:Think of it this way. You're a buxom young lady at the beach and the three companies are guys at trying to catch your eye. Microsoft and Sony are chiseled tan hunks of men letting the sun rays glisten off of their perfect washboard abs as they come out of the water in slow motion. Nintendo is the scrawny pasty guy on the shore, introspectively staring off into the horizon and painting a picture of the sea.
Again you're a young lady at the beach, only the PS3 and 360 are two 17 year old jocks, wrestling with eachother, while the wii, an 11 year old kid, is building a sand castle. The PC is your middle aged dad. Who will you date and why?
You might've, but I sure didn't. I was I think 9 when the 64 came out, and I sure thought it was twice as powerful as the Playstation.WeepingAngels said:...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?Ruzinus said:In 1996 when Nintendo named its next gen console the Nintendo 64 to try and make it seem better than the Playstation.KazeAizen said:When did console generations begin being defined by tech specs?
Isnt that how console generations were always defined? New consoles alwaysa having new tech that allows for new, better games, yadda yadda...KazeAizen said:When did console generations begin being defined by tech specs?
Or I could be one of the sensible people that have both a pc and a Nintendo console best of both worlds.Remus said:If Nintendo did that then we might actually consider them next gen. Defend them all you like, Nintendo has almost no third party support for the very reasons espoused in this thread. They are too far behind the curve technologically for Moore's law to even remotely apply to them. You look forward to the next Mario, Zelda, or Metroid. I'll stick to my PC, which IS upgradeable, and the true next gen consoles that at least attempt to keep up with current technological trends for higher graphic fidelity, more interative environments, and overall increased immersion. I am looking forward to the next 2 years of gaming simply because major developers will not feel nearly so bottlenecked whenever a console port of a PC game is requested.nima55 said:snip
Because hes the best option right now and later on when he gets a bit older you can upgrade from him?veloper said:That's correct. And do you also know why?Guitarmasterx7 said:My dad, because I'm a little bit fucked up that way. Wait...veloper said:Your analogy made me laugh, but I can still improve upon it.Guitarmasterx7 said:Think of it this way. You're a buxom young lady at the beach and the three companies are guys at trying to catch your eye. Microsoft and Sony are chiseled tan hunks of men letting the sun rays glisten off of their perfect washboard abs as they come out of the water in slow motion. Nintendo is the scrawny pasty guy on the shore, introspectively staring off into the horizon and painting a picture of the sea.
Again you're a young lady at the beach, only the PS3 and 360 are two 17 year old jocks, wrestling with eachother, while the wii, an 11 year old kid, is building a sand castle. The PC is your middle aged dad. Who will you date and why?
Basically, this.yesbag said:A gen is not really a "time frame". Though that does come into play when a new type is released.
But usually, it's based on the generation of systems.
My list will be incomplete, but has the main systems of the gens I've decided to show - I honestly don't remember if the Atari and Collecovision are first or second, so I won't include them:
8th: PS4, Xbone, WiiU
7th: PS3, 360, Wii
6th: PS2, Xbox, Gamecube, Dreamcast
5th: PS1, N64, Saturn
4th: SNES, Genesis, TG-16, Neo Geo
3rd: NES, Master System
Pretty much sums it up.yesbag said:It's really not that tricky. I don't know why younger gamers have to needlessly complicate things these days.