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

[lapan]

Well maybe its because, good or bad, most people expect a next generation console to bring something new to gaming. Ya, a console with a tablet is different but considering nobody bought it and nobody cares nothing really changed because of it.

Sony seems to care enough to copy it by making the Vita the PS4's version of that tablet.

 

[Billy D Williams]

Well maybe its because, good or bad, most people expect a next generation console to bring something new to gaming. Ya, a console with a tablet is different but considering nobody bought it and nobody cares nothing really changed because of it.

Sony seems to care enough to copy it by making the Vita the PS4's version of that tablet.

Ehhhh not really... not really at all. I mean I can kinda see the similarities but they're distinctly different and I doubt it has anything to do with actual competition, at best they saw what Nintendo did and thought they might be able to do something similar with their own hardware. I'm not even a Sony fanboy, I'm just stating that Nintendo isn't doing well at all and the Wii U hasn't really had an impact on gaming.

 

[lapan]

at best they saw what Nintendo did and thought they might be able to do something similar with their own hardware.

Exactly. Actually Microsoft seems to have done a similar thing as well.

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/168050-ps4-and-xbox-one-both-have-second-screen-functionality-but-does-it-matter

The goal is clear, they want to siphon even more of Nintendos potential gamerbase. (Not that I can fault them for it, it's just business)

 

[Joccaren]

Yeah, I don't get it either. The WiiU being a 7.5 gen due to it being released a year earlier I can kinda get. Specs though? What?

Isn't the whole console argument "You don't have to worry about specs"?
So why are we worrying about specs?
Seriously. Just enjoy the games that come out for each platform. There's as much whining about Nintendo specs as there are PC gamers whining about PS4/Xbone specs. On one hand though people get defensive, on the other they're like "But its so old!".
It is part of the eighth gen due to time of release. Who cares about its specs, just look at the games. That's what's important, and what most say is important, so why not follow through with that?

Well maybe its because, good or bad, most people expect a next generation console to bring something new to gaming. Ya, a console with a tablet is different but considering nobody bought it and nobody cares nothing really changed because of it.

That's largely Nintendo's fault for holding back their games. At release the main titles on the WiiU were titles that already existed on other consoles, and a couple of games that people saw as "Gimmicky", or cool, but not enough to buy the console for.
Now things like Pikmin 3, a new Mario game, probably a new Zelda, Smash Bros - and more of Nintendo's strong IPs are being announced and released... Right as the PS4 and Xbone come out. Really poor planning by Nintendo. Had they come out of the gate strong, with their strong IPs, and ports of current gen games, and a couple of the current gen/next gen crossovers - then they would have a lot bigger install base than what they're looking to have ATM. It had potential, but Nintendo marketing and management kinda failed there.

 

[lapan]

Really poor planning by Nintendo. Had they come out of the gate strong, with their strong IPs, and ports of current gen games, and a couple of the current gen/next gen crossovers - then they would have a lot bigger install base than what they're looking to have ATM. It had potential, but Nintendo marketing and management kinda failed there.

Nowadays you rarely get strong launches from any console or handheld. The vita had the same problems (and still has)

 

[ChaoshadowZero]

I'm sick of these threads whining about what people think about Nintendo and why they're wrong. It's always the same thing- someone gives an apparently popular opinion on why Nintendo are crap and then states why they are wrong and Nintendo are still relevant.

Well guess what? IT DOESN'T MATTER

I'm a Nintendo fan, I have been since the Game Boy Colour and N64; and I don't give a crap what people are saying about whether or not it's an 8th Gen console because I know that I enjoy it and that's all that really matters.

To sum up my point; people have opinions, they should not affect your enjoyment of the product.

 

[InvaderTim]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_video_game_consoles_(Eighth_generation)

if Wikipedia says WiiU is in the eighth generation, then it's in the eighth generation.

On another note, the Ouya, the Piston, The Steam machine(s) and the Nvidia Shield are also 8th gen systems.
Generations are a clumsy representation of big companies releasing competing systems within the same time frame, not a measure of power.
Also I see no reason for people arguing over the definition of console generations. Just buy the console that has the games you want to play on and let people do the same. We don't need another thing to be elitist about.

 

[Andy of Comix Inc]

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

Apparently no-one paid attention when the PS2 was the weakest in its generation.

(Also, nerd tangent, the Kessel Run is measured in parsecs because it passes by a blackhole, and the closer you get to the blackhole, the more space bends - making the route shorter. It also means you're closer to being sucked into a black freaking hole. So when Han Solo says he made the Kessel run in "less than 12 parsecs," it's cos he's a badass that swung by the maw of a reality-altering implosion, not that he's using parsecs to measure the time it took him)

 

[Terramax]

DISCLAIMER: I don't care what generation the Wii U is supposed to be. However...

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 get the feeling people are going to start arguing the generation of the Wii U the same way people still argue about the generation of the Dreamcast. Although I hope it doesn't come to that.

When did console generations begin being defined by tech specs?

I'd say at as late as the 16bit generation when the Megadrive hit the shelves. Of course, it may have been earlier.

Also if those are so freaking important to everyone I kind of feel sad about gamings future.

Not just to do with specs. Ultimately, the games being released on the 2 other major consoles, PC, and everything else in between won't be capable of being played on the Wii U.

Also, graphics and power do certainly matter in terms of what kinds of games your making and what emotions you're trying to get from the player. Whilst storytelling reigns supreme, there are video games that do work better for having more visual... weight. But this really does come down to what game companies do with the technology.

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.

Personally, I think conversations like that would suck even more.

 

[karloss01]

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.

^ This
Specs matter when it comes to the games that will be on it. the Wii U is unfortunately going to be left behind as its specs won't be able to run PS4/Xbone games without a major downgrade. and from what I hear from my friend at GAME most customers that aren't your tech savvy nerd think the Wii U is a Wii with a new peripheral thrown in and are surprised when they are told its a new console.

 

[GoaThief]

Well maybe its because, good or bad, most people expect a next generation console to bring something new to gaming. Ya, a console with a tablet is different but considering nobody bought it and nobody cares nothing really changed because of it.

Sony seems to care enough to copy it by making the Vita the PS4's version of that tablet.

You are aware that the PS3 used the Vita as a off screen/extra input device before the Wii U was even released, right? If anything Nintendo copied Sony.

 

[lapan]

Well maybe its because, good or bad, most people expect a next generation console to bring something new to gaming. Ya, a console with a tablet is different but considering nobody bought it and nobody cares nothing really changed because of it.

Sony seems to care enough to copy it by making the Vita the PS4's version of that tablet.

You are aware that the PS3 used the Vita as a off screen/extra input device before the Wii U was even released, right? If anything Nintendo copied Sony.

Wasn't that only a crossplay mode that included copying your saves back and forth and was only compatible with a few games?

 

[MetalDooley]

Apparently no-one paid attention when the PS2 was the weakest in its generation.

They didn't.A lot of people don't seem to know it was the weakest console of the big 3

Also I bow to your superior knowledge of the Kessel run sir

You are aware that the PS3 used the Vita as a off screen/extra input device before the Wii U was even released, right? If anything Nintendo copied Sony.

I feel I should point out that Nintendo did the whole using a handheld as an extra input device thingy back with the GBA and Gamecube.Who copied who again?

 

[Warachia]

Apparently no-one paid attention when the PS2 was the weakest in its generation.

They didn't.A lot of people don't seem to know it was the weakest console of the big 3

Also I bow to your superior knowledge of the Kessel run sir

You are aware that the PS3 used the Vita as a off screen/extra input device before the Wii U was even released, right? If anything Nintendo copied Sony.

I feel I should point out that Nintendo did the whole using a handheld as an extra input device thingy back with the GBA and Gamecube.Who copied who again?

That worked out entirely differently though, you had to connect it through cables, it would have connection issues, and you couldn't play the games through the GBA, you still needed a tv and the GBA would have to supplement the Gamecube in some way, so it wasn't cross-play at all.

 

[MetalDooley]

That worked out entirely differently though, you had to connect it through cables, it would have connection issues, and you couldn't play the games through the GBA, you still needed a tv and the GBA would have to supplement the Gamecube in some way, so it wasn't cross-play at all.

Never said it was cross play.I was just making the point that Nintendo were experimenting with connecting your handheld to your console years before Sony even released a handheld

 

[Warachia]

That worked out entirely differently though, you had to connect it through cables, it would have connection issues, and you couldn't play the games through the GBA, you still needed a tv and the GBA would have to supplement the Gamecube in some way, so it wasn't cross-play at all.

Never said it was cross play.I was just making the point that Nintendo were experimenting with connecting your handheld to your console years before Sony even released a handheld

My mistake then, I assumed when you inferred that they what the vita does from what Nintendo did, that you were saying the GBA does the same thing the Vita does.

 

[Korolev]

Because the WiiU was Nintendo catching up to the last generation. Now they are being left behind again. At least, that's how I see it. New Generations are, partly, defined by new hardware and software.I don't see the WiiU has being an answer or an equal to the Xbox One or PS4. I see it as a last ditch effort to make some equivalent to the 360 and the PS3. The WiiU could almost be considered.... the last console of the last generation.

 

[GoaThief]

That worked out entirely differently though, you had to connect it through cables, it would have connection issues, and you couldn't play the games through the GBA, you still needed a tv and the GBA would have to supplement the Gamecube in some way, so it wasn't cross-play at all.

Never said it was cross play.I was just making the point that Nintendo were experimenting with connecting your handheld to your console years before Sony even released a handheld

My mistake then, I assumed when you inferred that they what the vita does from what Nintendo did, that you were saying the GBA does the same thing the Vita does.

Who copied who doesn't really matter, the point is that it's not new technology or exclusive to the Wii U which certainly adds to the argument that the Wii U is not "next gen".

 

[Lightknight]

It's not that people don't think the 8th generation has arrived definitionally. It's a disagreement that the WiiU is functionally 8th gen. Just that the WiiU itself isn't a large enough technological step to feel like it's 8th gen technology. It's more powerful than the 360 and ps3, yes, but not by enough to make a drastic difference whereas the consoles we're getting next month are something like 10x as powerful (ps4/ps3 comparison).

What we like to see from generation to generation is a significant step. Thta is the entire point of dividing consoles by generation, they're tiered. Something large enough to make us want to change and to give us a new experience. Nintendo singlehandedly brought peripheral control to the console market with the wiimote. While technologically everyone laughed at it, it at least made a step in user interface that made it fresh and enjoyable. This time though, it uses the same controller and a gamepad which only a handful of games actually utilize and the ones that do generally have workarounds that would manage on a thumbstick. So for an added $140 price to the console that is an underpowered entry for the 8th generation it's no wonder why it is dismissed.

Add that to the fact that the WiiU isn't popular at all. It's selling around 120k units per month now (1.5 million units per year to put that in perspective. They wouldn't breach 10 million for another 4 years at this rate if we assume they've hit 4 million this month). So, they are on track to sell fewer units than the Dreamcast did in the same amount of time. Considering that the gamer market is larger now that means it's doing even worse even if it exactly matches the Dreamcast's numbers (dreamcast sold just over 10 million units from september 9, 1999-march 30, 2001. (first launched in Japan in 1998 but didn't make it to a global market until sept. 1999). 19 months in the global market, 10.4 million units. That's 528,421 units per month on average. Even giving it the full 30 months for the year it was in Japan only you'd be looking at 334,700. WiiU's average is around that number thanks to the initial five months that saw 3 million units sold. But with every month that ratio is dropping and next month it may be exactly that rate as it finally exceeds 4 million like it's so close to doing. But it has to be over 5 million per year to even match the Dreamcasts' sales. Sales should have been much higher last month. The big $50 sale hit on the 20th and we only saw 10k more units sold in September than August. I didn't expect the $50 to fix the problem, but I did expect better performance.

So while yes, this is the 8th generation, it's rapidly shaping up to be one of the failures of the generation and not a legitimate entry. Nintendo does have those from time to time. Consider that the gamecube only sold 22 Million units when all was said and done and I believe it was even more powerful than the competition despite being cheaper. Playstation 2 sold nearly 7 times as many. Followed by the wii which has just broken 100 million. So while the WiiU may fail, Nintendo isn't necessarily out of the game. But this does certainly make consumers not feel like the console is a legitimate 8th gen entry. The dreamcast was also the system that followed the abysmal Sega Saturn. Successful console companies can usually wade out one or two failures after a successful generation. Nintendo is sitting on gobs of cash so this won't be the death of them. But it will signify change for the company. It's difficult when Nintendo doesn't have the sort of ties Sony and Microsoft have to hardware companies.

But for all these reasons, the WiiU just looks like a really late entry into the 7th generation without being advanced enough to warrant a new tier. If it is 8th gen, it is the Wii of the 8th gen but without a wiimote equivalent to push it.

 

[KazeAizen]

I get the feeling people are going to start arguing the generation of the Wii U the same way people still argue about the generation of the Dreamcast. Although I hope it doesn't come to that.

Me either.

I'd say at as late as the 16bit generation when the Megadrive hit the shelves. Of course, it may have been earlier.

I was never aware that it started that early. Hell I was a kid in the 90s. Generations didn't even really become a thing until Gamecube it seems to me.

Not just to do with specs. Ultimately, the games being released on the 2 other major consoles, PC, and everything else in between won't be capable of being played on the Wii U.

Also, graphics and power do certainly matter in terms of what kinds of games your making and what emotions you're trying to get from the player. Whilst storytelling reigns supreme, there are video games that do work better for having more visual... weight. But this really does come down to what game companies do with the technology.

And this is where I think the entire industry has misstepped. Save for indies because they don't have that kind of budget and Nintendo who gets it. Just because a console or platform has greater graphical capabilities doesn't mean we should utilize it for the sake of using it. It means the games cost more to make and that just puts pressure on it being a hit. Hell I think less powerful stuff is what we need right now. We've reached a graphical apex with consoles and PCs. They need to hang back, work with what we've got for a bit, and not spend money on ways that will cause them to spend that much more money. People claim a huge gap between PCs and consoles. In this day an age I don't see it. That gap has closed.

Personally, I think conversations like that would suck even more.

It'd be more fun then talking about arbitrary numbers that only tech heads care about. Essentially I want a return to the days of the mascot wars. Just as heated but more fun then saying. My graphical processor can kick the shit out of his graphical processor. I know its not good to dwell in the past but I can't be the only one who misses the days when the war's participants were actual characters instead of numbers.