Are we in Gen. 9 now? Will we ever be?

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

The Switch is now starting to become actually available to purchase. It has sold about six million consoles in some 6 months. I am curious if only early adopters were the ones after it and good luck selling much more from here on out.

image

Funny they still have the VITA on their chart.

But, are we in Gen 9 now? Will we ever be? Sony and Microsoft claim this is it. There will be iterative improvements on their consoles but none will ever be obsolete again. There will be no clear demarcation on when we've entered a new gen from their perspective. Unless Sony Announces PS5 at the next E3.

Your thoughts?

I think the "next" gen is whenever you have to buy a completely new system to continue playing games.

When you have to buy a Playstation 5 to play the next set of games. When you have to buy an Xbox XYZ. Or when your current PC Graphics card can no longer play new games coming out on at least Medium settings.

I think that is a fair bar.

Sure Sony and Microsoft have said that they will continue to itterate on current console hardware and every couple of years adding a slightly better system. But I feel that at some point they'll have to make an entirely new system with a jump in tech to continue.

If your base Ps4 can't play the newest playstation game, and you need a brand new system then that is a new generation.

CritialGaming:
If your base Ps4 can't play the newest playstation game, and you need a brand new system then that is a new generation.

This sums up my thoughts on the matter pretty well. When a console loses the ability of "forward compatibility," you can officially call it a new generation. I'd argue that for PC, there really aren't generations like there are for consoles. If we had to pick a barometer though, I'd probably go with graphics card series (ie: Nvidia 800s, 900s, 1000, etc) as the closest metric.

Yay the Vita is still alive thanks to Otakus. I think everything depends on whether we get into a plateau in hardware strength to the point that any further graphical improvement will not be noticable enough to warrant the extra developement time.

Avnger:

CritialGaming:
If your base Ps4 can't play the newest playstation game, and you need a brand new system then that is a new generation.

This sums up my thoughts on the matter pretty well. When a console loses the ability of "forward compatibility," you can officially call it a new generation. I'd argue that for PC, there really aren't generations like there are for consoles. If we had to pick a barometer though, I'd probably go with graphics card series (ie: Nvidia 800s, 900s, 1000, etc) as the closest metric.

And even then GPU generations don't make that much of an impact. In many cases you can still get by playing a game intended for the current card generation on a GPU that's two generations behind. Also consider that a majority of PC games developed these days are intended to run on older machines/operating systems.

I'm not really sure a comparable metric truly exists for PC gaming, which is actually a good thing if you ask me.

We'll still have console generations for the foreseeable future. This one will run much longer than the last one though, since both Sony and Microsoft seem dedicated to iterating on their current hardware. While Nintendo have released a new console, it's not a significant improvement over the Wii U from a technical standpoint, and it's unusual design mean Nintendo will have a reason to support it even if they release a new home console.

Fappy:

Avnger:

CritialGaming:
If your base Ps4 can't play the newest playstation game, and you need a brand new system then that is a new generation.

This sums up my thoughts on the matter pretty well. When a console loses the ability of "forward compatibility," you can officially call it a new generation. I'd argue that for PC, there really aren't generations like there are for consoles. If we had to pick a barometer though, I'd probably go with graphics card series (ie: Nvidia 800s, 900s, 1000, etc) as the closest metric.

And even then GPU generations don't make that much of an impact. In many cases you can still get by playing a game intended for the current card generation on a GPU that's two generations behind. Also consider that a majority of PC games developed these days are intended to run on older machines/operating systems.

I'm not really sure a comparable metric truly exists for PC gaming, which is actually a good thing if you ask me.

There is a reason why I mentioned graphic requirements for PC in my OP. Basically I feel you can call it a "new PC generation when a given level of graphics cards doesn't cut it anymore. For example the next PC gen will be when GTX1000 series cards can no longer play games on Medium settings. (I don't count low because a lot of the experience is lost with so much detail turned off)

No, we're in Gen 8.
Gen 7 was PS3, and we're one generation after that.
That's how numbers work.

Nintendo doesn't count. They're not even trying to compete with the others anymore. We're in gen 8.

Avnger:

This sums up my thoughts on the matter pretty well. When a console loses the ability of "forward compatibility," you can officially call it a new generation. I'd argue that for PC, there really aren't generations like there are for consoles. If we had to pick a barometer though, I'd probably go with graphics card series (ie: Nvidia 800s, 900s, 1000, etc) as the closest metric.

Fappy:

And even then GPU generations don't make that much of an impact. In many cases you can still get by playing a game intended for the current card generation on a GPU that's two generations behind. Also consider that a majority of PC games developed these days are intended to run on older machines/operating systems.
I'm not really sure a comparable metric truly exists for PC gaming, which is actually a good thing if you ask me.

I think my HD7970 is some 3 generations old (I got it about 5-6 years ago). It is DX 12 capable and is playing games like Witcher 3 at 30 FPS using high settings which is pretty good. I do think PC generations are more difficult to judge (I have a 9 yr old I7 930 build with a newer RX 480 that is playing games even better.)than consoles.
Avnger: hard to say when those gens changed on PC. That I7 930 had a GTS 250 in it. That ancient piece of tech finally wasn't enough for gaming (could play media pretty well though!). When was the last time you said, "this card has had it?"

09philj:
We'll still have console generations for the foreseeable future. This one will run much longer than the last one though, since both Sony and Microsoft seem dedicated to iterating on their current hardware. While Nintendo have released a new console, it's not a significant improvement over the Wii U from a technical standpoint, and it's unusual design mean Nintendo will have a reason to support it even if they release a new home console.

Playing Zelda Breath of the Wild on Wii U. I've seen the comparison videos and side by side, there is a difference. By itself? Not really notable. It is radically new tech. The Switch console itself appears to be smaller than the Wii U Pad itself and I can take it on the go, while the pad must be kept near the TV. Limits me.

Maybe?
I have no idea how this gen is going to be named.

8.5 to 9.5 to 9.7?

Tanis:
Maybe?
I have no idea how this gen is going to be named.

8.5 to 9.5 to 9.7?

These iterations have been something reasonably new. Sega 16 came out with a 32 bit adapter and disc player a million years ago. N64 had the 4 meg ram pak. The PS2 and 3 slim versions had the same gameplay, just physically different looking. But this gen? PS4 plus, Xbox S and now X? And what is next for Sony?

Like adding that 4 meg ram pak, these systems are offering something new, making them at least Gen 8.5 to my mind. The Switch isn't so much more powerful than Wii U but something really different. But without substantially better graphics, is it also gen 8.5.

Good time to be a consumer.

Souplex:
No, we're in Gen 8.
Gen 7 was PS3, and we're one generation after that.
That's how numbers work.

Was Gen 8 kicked off in 2012 with the Wii U? PS3 was out for another year. Now, 2017, we have the Switch with PS4 still out there.

Ezekiel:
Nintendo doesn't count. They're not even trying to compete with the others anymore. We're in gen 8.

Makes some sense. But like I asked above, did Wii U kick off Gen 8 a year before PS4?

Nintendo is currently in the 9th console generation.

Sony and MS are currently in the 8th generation. when the PS5 and next Xbox iteration come out they will be the 9th generation consoles for those companies.

generations relate to time not power of a console.

Souplex:
No, we're in Gen 8.
Gen 7 was PS3, and we're one generation after that.
That's how numbers work.

exactly.

the PS3, Wii and Xbox 360 were the 7th generation of consoles. the PS4, Xbox One and Wii U were the 8th generation of consoles.

and now the Switch is the start of the 9th generation of consoles. the 9th generation PS5 and 4th Xbox whatever that might be called will probably be anounced and release in a year or 2 as well now.

Ezekiel:
Nintendo doesn't count. They're not even trying to compete with the others anymore. We're in gen 8.

just because Nintendo is aiming for a different demographic doesn't mean they aren't competitors of Sony and Microsoft.

they are all videogame companies and they are all competing for consumers money no matter how they go about doing it whether you like it or not.

Console generations are a lie - console competition doubly so. Ask yourself what the chances are of multiple companies, for example Microsoft and Sony, both releasing new consoles around the same time at around the same price with around the same hardware - all of it occurring naturally. The so-called console wars are a sham invented to take people's eyes off the flagrant collusion and price fixing between companies. Dump consoles, and build you own PC's. I have a video card from the Nvidia's last chip generation and an Intel CPU that's two generations old. It will run any modern game you throw at it.

RedRockRun:
Console generations are a lie - console competition doubly so. Ask yourself what the chances are of multiple companies, for example Microsoft and Sony, both releasing new consoles around the same time at around the same price with around the same hardware - all of it occurring naturally. The so-called console wars are a sham invented to take people's eyes off the flagrant collusion and price fixing between companies. Dump consoles, and build you own PC's. I have a video card from the Nvidia's last chip generation and an Intel CPU that's two generations old. It will run any modern game you throw at it.

We discussed earlier how hard it is to measure generations for PCs. I have an old i7-930 with a new rx 480 and it can play about anything. But my PS3 is obsolete compared to a PS4. And that is that.

Back in the day, NES was bitching about Sega coming out with a new 16 bit systems. Why, they asked. No need for this! But Sega did it and NES had to keep up, and did with the SNES.

I worry that without the competition, the console people would sit on their laurels and us consumers would suffer for it.

This is probably the weirdest generation ever, Every device besides the VITA has gotten a 1.5 update. The New 3DS, Wii U Portable(SWITCH), Xbox one X, and the PS4 Pro.

Yoshi178:

Ezekiel:
Nintendo doesn't count. They're not even trying to compete with the others anymore. We're in gen 8.

just because Nintendo is aiming for a different demographic doesn't mean they aren't competitors of Sony and Microsoft.

they are all videogame companies and they are all competing for consumers money no matter how they go about doing it whether you like it or not.

Whether I like it or not? I don't care one way or another. Better graphics aren't gonna make their unappealing kiddie franchises and cheap little experiments more appealing to me. Nintendo doesn't try to stay with the others at the front of the graphics competition anymore, like they used to. They release their consoles at totally different intervals now. When Microsoft releases their new consoles, Sony tries not to be far behind, but with Nintendo, nobody cares. They don't affect the gaming landscape and developers on a huge scale. So, they're not part of the generations anymore. It's just gonna get even more confusing when they release their next Nintendo maybe two years after the PS5. Eventually, they're gonna be, according to you people, two generations ahead, even though their newest console may be inferior to the others.

RedRockRun:
Console generations are a lie - console competition doubly so. Ask yourself what the chances are of multiple companies, for example Microsoft and Sony, both releasing new consoles around the same time at around the same price with around the same hardware - all of it occurring naturally. The so-called console wars are a sham invented to take people's eyes off the flagrant collusion and price fixing between companies. Dump consoles, and build you own PC's. I have a video card from the Nvidia's last chip generation and an Intel CPU that's two generations old. It will run any modern game you throw at it.

This is only with the Xbox 1, The PS4 is entry level VR for about about 849, you get the PS4 Pro, Camera, head set and Move controllers. A PC cable of doing VR by its self is going to be about 849, then you have to buy a VR Head set and the controllers. You can correct me if Im wrong.

The Switc is truly portable and has AAA games that do local multiplayer.

Ezekiel:

Yoshi178:

Ezekiel:
Nintendo doesn't count. They're not even trying to compete with the others anymore. We're in gen 8.

just because Nintendo is aiming for a different demographic doesn't mean they aren't competitors of Sony and Microsoft.

they are all videogame companies and they are all competing for consumers money no matter how they go about doing it whether you like it or not.

Whether I like it or not? I don't care one way or another. Better graphics aren't gonna make their unappealing kiddie franchises and cheap little experiments more appealing to me. Nintendo doesn't try to stay with the others at the front of the graphics competition anymore, like they used to. They release their consoles at totally different intervals now. When Microsoft releases their new consoles, Sony tries not to be far behind, but with Nintendo, nobody cares. They don't affect the gaming landscape and developers on a huge scale. So, they're not part of the generations anymore. It's just gonna get even more confusing when they release their next Nintendo maybe two years after the PS5. Eventually, they're gonna be, according to you people, two generations ahead, even though their newest console may be inferior to the others.

Nintendo still affects the game industry even though they aren't pushing Graphics. BOTW Probably will cause newer games to be less linear. The Wii started Motion controls and the DS started touch controls in gaming. The PS4 has a track pad and the Xboxone launched with the Kinect. The Success of the SNES MINI and the NES Mini is the reason why we got super medicore SEGA HD Console. Also Konami registered the trademark for the Turbo Graphics 16. Hopefully if Konami does a mini console, it isn't shit like the SEGA one and is in Proper stock. I hope Sony hasn't abandoned the handheld space and Probably could just make a PS4 portable

Ezekiel:
Whether I like it or not? I don't care one way or another.

says one thing.

Ezekiel:
Better graphics aren't gonna make their unappealing kiddie franchises and cheap little experiments more appealing to me. Nintendo doesn't try to stay with the others at the front of the graphics competition anymore, like they used to. They release their consoles at totally different intervals now. When Microsoft releases their new consoles, Sony tries not to be far behind, but with Nintendo, nobody cares. They don't affect the gaming landscape and developers on a huge scale. So, they're not part of the generations anymore. It's just gonna get even more confusing when they release their next Nintendo maybe two years after the PS5. Eventually, they're gonna be, according to you people, two generations ahead, even though their newest console may be inferior to the others.

then proceeds to go on a rant about he doesn't consider Nintendo relevant and that he's not interested in them despite the fact that he literally just said he doesn't care one way or the one.

if you didn't care you would've stopped right after that sentence rather than going on a big rant about how "not relevant" you consider them to be. either you don't care or you do. pick one.

Yoshi178:

Ezekiel:
Whether I like it or not? I don't care one way or another.

says one thing.

Ezekiel:
Better graphics aren't gonna make their unappealing kiddie franchises and cheap little experiments more appealing to me. Nintendo doesn't try to stay with the others at the front of the graphics competition anymore, like they used to. They release their consoles at totally different intervals now. When Microsoft releases their new consoles, Sony tries not to be far behind, but with Nintendo, nobody cares. They don't affect the gaming landscape and developers on a huge scale. So, they're not part of the generations anymore. It's just gonna get even more confusing when they release their next Nintendo maybe two years after the PS5. Eventually, they're gonna be, according to you people, two generations ahead, even though their newest console may be inferior to the others.

then proceeds to go on a rant about he doesn't consider Nintendo relevant and that he's not interested in them despite the fact that he literally just said he doesn't care one way or the one.

if you didn't care you would've stopped right after that sentence rather than going on a big rant about how "not relevant" you consider them to be. either you don't care or you do. pick one.

Oh brother... Writing a few sentences doesn't take effort, and I wouldn't even call what I wrote a rant. I don't care about Nintendo, meaning I don't want to play their games. Doesn't mean I have nothing to say about them. I also know you're complicated to argue with, so I'm gonna say more than a few words. I didn't think you'd reply with basically nothing.

Ezekiel:

Yoshi178:

Ezekiel:
Whether I like it or not? I don't care one way or another.

says one thing.

Ezekiel:
Better graphics aren't gonna make their unappealing kiddie franchises and cheap little experiments more appealing to me. Nintendo doesn't try to stay with the others at the front of the graphics competition anymore, like they used to. They release their consoles at totally different intervals now. When Microsoft releases their new consoles, Sony tries not to be far behind, but with Nintendo, nobody cares. They don't affect the gaming landscape and developers on a huge scale. So, they're not part of the generations anymore. It's just gonna get even more confusing when they release their next Nintendo maybe two years after the PS5. Eventually, they're gonna be, according to you people, two generations ahead, even though their newest console may be inferior to the others.

then proceeds to go on a rant about he doesn't consider Nintendo relevant and that he's not interested in them despite the fact that he literally just said he doesn't care one way or the one.

if you didn't care you would've stopped right after that sentence rather than going on a big rant about how "not relevant" you consider them to be. either you don't care or you do. pick one.

Oh brother... Writing a few sentences doesn't take effort, and I wouldn't even call what I wrote a rant. I don't care about Nintendo, meaning I don't want to play their games. Doesn't mean I have nothing to say about them. I also know you're complicated to argue with, so I'm gonna say more than a few words. I didn't think you'd reply with basically nothing.

ok fair enough.

regardless just because you don't care about Nintendo doesn't mean much. they are still competitors in the console video gaming market regardless of your personal thoughts on them. Microsoft and Sony just happen to focus their attention on having the most powerful box and Nintendo focus's on unique ways to play games, currently being on taking your home console games on the go with you as a handheld and vice versa.

and console generations relate to time on the market and which number iteration the console is. PS2/Xbox Original/ Gamecube and Dream cast made up the 6th generation of consoles, Wii/PS3/360 made up the 7th generation, PS4/Xbox One/Wii U made up the 8th generation, and now the Switch is Nintendo's next mainline console release which makes the Switch the start of the 9th generation of consoles.

PS5 and the 4th xbox will probably be announced in a year or 2 and they will also be in the 9th generation of consoles.

There really aren't rigidly defined generations anymore, now that incremental upgrades appear to be the norm. My prediction is that once bandwidth infrastructure catches up with network speeds, we'll see a shift to pure set-top streaming "boxes" akin to a Roku. Console games will devolve into a mere service vs a product, with subscriptions mandatory. At that point l'll simply stop buying consoles personally, since without a hard drive to store games on, you'll never "own" anything and will always be at the mercy of a stupid server and network connection. While they may improve with time, they will never be as reliable or secure as a local, physical device that can be played both on or offline.

PC's will mostly be immune to this because there will always be a market for the physical components; at least I bloody well hope so, but then again stranger (and dumber) things have been known to happen. The point is it's up to the gaming consumer to prevent this loss of control and ownership, but this tenet hasn't historically trended well in our favor.

Yoshi178:

Ezekiel:

Yoshi178:

says one thing.

then proceeds to go on a rant about he doesn't consider Nintendo relevant and that he's not interested in them despite the fact that he literally just said he doesn't care one way or the one.

if you didn't care you would've stopped right after that sentence rather than going on a big rant about how "not relevant" you consider them to be. either you don't care or you do. pick one.

Oh brother... Writing a few sentences doesn't take effort, and I wouldn't even call what I wrote a rant. I don't care about Nintendo, meaning I don't want to play their games. Doesn't mean I have nothing to say about them. I also know you're complicated to argue with, so I'm gonna say more than a few words. I didn't think you'd reply with basically nothing.

ok fair enough.

regardless just because you don't care about Nintendo doesn't mean much.

You said, "whether you like it or not." Why do you make a presumption about my opinion and then say it doesn't matter? I didn't pretend my feelings about Nintendo are true for everyone else. You're the one who brought it up.

they are still competitors in the console video gaming market regardless of your personal thoughts on them. Microsoft and Sony just happen to focus their attention on having the most powerful box and Nintendo focus's on unique ways to play games, currently being on taking your home console games on the go with you as a handheld and vice versa.

and console generations relate to time on the market and which number iteration the console is. PS2/Xbox Original/ Gamecube and Dream cast made up the 6th generation of consoles, Wii/PS3/360 made up the 7th generation, PS4/Xbox One/Wii U made up the 8th generation, and now the Switch is Nintendo's next mainline console release which makes the Switch the start of the 9th generation of consoles.

PS5 and the 4th xbox will probably be announced in a year or 2 and they will also be in the 9th generation of consoles.

At this rate, the future Nintendo may be gen 12 and the PlayStation may be gen 10. It's a worthless way of thinking when Nintendo are basically in their own bubble now. Sony and MS aren't gonna rush to release their new consoles just because Nintendo already released theirs. Most of the third party developers don't care. When the other two release new consoles, it's a big deal. Even PC games are affected.

Ezekiel:

Yoshi178:

Ezekiel:
Oh brother... Writing a few sentences doesn't take effort, and I wouldn't even call what I wrote a rant. I don't care about Nintendo, meaning I don't want to play their games. Doesn't mean I have nothing to say about them. I also know you're complicated to argue with, so I'm gonna say more than a few words. I didn't think you'd reply with basically nothing.

ok fair enough.

regardless just because you don't care about Nintendo doesn't mean much.

You said, "whether you like it or not." Why do you make a presumption about my opinion and then say it doesn't matter? I didn't pretend my feelings about Nintendo are true for everyone else. You're the one who brought it up.

they are still competitors in the console video gaming market regardless of your personal thoughts on them. Microsoft and Sony just happen to focus their attention on having the most powerful box and Nintendo focus's on unique ways to play games, currently being on taking your home console games on the go with you as a handheld and vice versa.

and console generations relate to time on the market and which number iteration the console is. PS2/Xbox Original/ Gamecube and Dream cast made up the 6th generation of consoles, Wii/PS3/360 made up the 7th generation, PS4/Xbox One/Wii U made up the 8th generation, and now the Switch is Nintendo's next mainline console release which makes the Switch the start of the 9th generation of consoles.

PS5 and the 4th xbox will probably be announced in a year or 2 and they will also be in the 9th generation of consoles.

At this rate, the future Nintendo may be gen 12 and the PlayStation may be gen 10. It's a worthless way of thinking when Nintendo are basically in their own bubble now. Sony and MS aren't gonna rush to release their new consoles just because Nintendo already released theirs. Most of the third party developers don't care. When the other two release new consoles, it's a big deal. Even PC games are affected.

who said anything about rushing to release the PS5 and Xbox 4?

Sony and MS didn't rush to release the PS4 and Xbox One. they came out a year after the Wii U launched. they are all still part of the same console generation though.

Yoshi178:

Ezekiel:

Yoshi178:
ok fair enough.

regardless just because you don't care about Nintendo doesn't mean much.

You said, "whether you like it or not." Why do you make a presumption about my opinion and then say it doesn't matter? I didn't pretend my feelings about Nintendo are true for everyone else. You're the one who brought it up.

they are still competitors in the console video gaming market regardless of your personal thoughts on them. Microsoft and Sony just happen to focus their attention on having the most powerful box and Nintendo focus's on unique ways to play games, currently being on taking your home console games on the go with you as a handheld and vice versa.

and console generations relate to time on the market and which number iteration the console is. PS2/Xbox Original/ Gamecube and Dream cast made up the 6th generation of consoles, Wii/PS3/360 made up the 7th generation, PS4/Xbox One/Wii U made up the 8th generation, and now the Switch is Nintendo's next mainline console release which makes the Switch the start of the 9th generation of consoles.

PS5 and the 4th xbox will probably be announced in a year or 2 and they will also be in the 9th generation of consoles.

At this rate, the future Nintendo may be gen 12 and the PlayStation may be gen 10. It's a worthless way of thinking when Nintendo are basically in their own bubble now. Sony and MS aren't gonna rush to release their new consoles just because Nintendo already released theirs. Most of the third party developers don't care. When the other two release new consoles, it's a big deal. Even PC games are affected.

who said anything about rushing to release the PS5 and Xbox 4?

Sony and MS didn't rush to release the PS4 and Xbox One. they came out a year after the Wii U launched. they are all still part of the same console generation though.

Sony always releases their PlayStation within a year of the Xbox. They have to, because similar games appear on the same consoles and people want better graphics. With Nintendo, that doesn't happen anymore. You buy a Nintendo for Nintendo games. It doesn't matter if it's only a marginal upgrade in terms of power. People will buy it anyway, for the Nintendo games and whatever the newest gimmick is.

Ezekiel:
Sony always releases their PlayStation within a year of the Xbox. They have to, because similar games appear on the same consoles and people want better graphics. With Nintendo, that doesn't happen anymore. You buy a Nintendo for Nintendo games. It doesn't matter if it's only a marginal upgrade in terms of power. People will buy it anyway, for the Nintendo games and whatever the newest gimmick is.

those reasons you just gave literally have NOTHING to do with each other.

Nintendo didn't release the Switch because they knew people would buy it because of the gimmick. hardly anyone bought the Wii U so that argument you just gave already makes no sense.

Nintendo released the Switch because they knew the Wii U was a hardware sales failure and the Switch is Nintendo's way of getting the company back in the market to compete for, oh i don't know, maybe SALES. you know?, the exact same thing that Sony and Microsoft try to make?

It's good that Nintendo is doing their own thing imo. As long as Sony and Microsoft compete directly (Sony has typically released first, aside from last gen), it's good to have a unique third option that eschews the norm. Being kid friendly has done them well so far, since there's no shortage of kids in the world and parents willing to spend money on them.

A new generation begins when the first next gen console is released. In this case, the Switch marked the beginning of the 9th generation. I don't see the point in changing the rules just because Sony and Microsoft decided to create upgraded consoles instead of new consoles.

Yoshi178:

Ezekiel:
Sony always releases their PlayStation within a year of the Xbox. They have to, because similar games appear on the same consoles and people want better graphics. With Nintendo, that doesn't happen anymore. You buy a Nintendo for Nintendo games. It doesn't matter if it's only a marginal upgrade in terms of power. People will buy it anyway, for the Nintendo games and whatever the newest gimmick is.

those reasons you just gave literally have NOTHING to do with each other.

Nintendo didn't release the Switch because they knew people would buy it because of the gimmick. hardly anyone bought the Wii U so that argument you just gave already makes no sense.

Nintendo released the Switch because they knew the Wii U was a hardware sales failure and the Switch is Nintendo's way of getting the company back in the market to compete for, oh i don't know, maybe SALES. you know?, the exact same thing that Sony and Microsoft try to make?

I didn't say they did. I said people will buy it anyway, for the Nintendo games and whatever the newest gimmick is. They could release their next Nintendo in the middle of Sony and Microsoft's next generation, and it still wouldn't have a huge effect on the rest of the industry. They're doing their own thing now. What I said is true. You're just misinterpreting and being overly defensive, as usual.

Ezekiel:
I didn't say they did. I said people will buy it anyway, for the Nintendo games and whatever the newest gimmick is.

yeah just like they bought the Wii U for it's "gimmick".

Ezekiel:
They could release their next Nintendo in the middle of Sony and Microsoft's next generation, and it still wouldn't have a huge effect on the rest of the industry. They're doing their own thing now. What I said is true. You're just misinterpreting and being overly defensive, as usual.

you still haven't explained at all why the Nintendo's hardware generations are so radically different from Sony's and Microsofts.

at the end of the day they are all still videogame console manufacturers and they are all competing for the same market. they just go about competing for that market in different ways. just because of that, it still doesn't mean that they're all different console generations. going off your views we may as well say that Nintendo is on their 8th generation, Sony is on their 4th generation and that Microsoft is only on their 3rd console generation.

Yoshi178:

Ezekiel:
I didn't say they did. I said people will buy it anyway, for the Nintendo games and whatever the newest gimmick is.

yeah just like they bought the Wii U for it's "gimmick".

Ezekiel:
They could release their next Nintendo in the middle of Sony and Microsoft's next generation, and it still wouldn't have a huge effect on the rest of the industry. They're doing their own thing now. What I said is true. You're just misinterpreting and being overly defensive, as usual.

you still haven't explained at all why the Nintendo's hardware generations are so radically different from Sony's and Microsofts.

at the end of the day they are all still videogame console manufacturers and they are all competing for the same market. they just go about competing for that market in different ways. just because of that, it still doesn't mean that they're all different console generations.

I think Ezekiel's point might be that Nintendo, being the routinely the objectively least powerful major console on the market, cannot pull the industry as a whole into a "next generation." They can do, as they have done, and release "another console," but their "next-ness" is on a different level from the major market, i.e.: PCs, Sony and Microsoft. No, Nintendo's chunk of the gaming market is not inconsequential, but seeing as they pretty much lack/don't require much-if-any significant third-party support, you don't see many major developers/publishers looking to gear their efforts to develop for their hardware, and the moment that the industry collectively begins to develop for new hardware is arguably when a "next gen" truly begins.

If we have to qualify it, we can say "the bar" for a new generation of gaming is one being pulled up by PCs, pushed up by Sony and Microsoft, and delightfully ignored by Nintendo.

Yoshi178:
going off your views we may as well say that Nintendo is on their 8th generation, Sony is on their 4th generation and that Microsoft is only on their 3rd console generation.

You're not entirely wrong; I feel the console "generations" are largely an arbitrary (if manufactured) measurement as simply a broad indicator of when the major competitors looks to compete on a higher level of hardware.

I don't know if the Switch counts as Gen 9... it's basically a Wii U with a more versatile portable gimmick. Maybe Gen 8.5?

Gorfias:
We discussed earlier how hard it is to measure generations for PCs. I have an old i7-930 with a new rx 480 and it can play about anything. But my PS3 is obsolete compared to a PS4. And that is that.

Back in the day, NES was bitching about Sega coming out with a new 16 bit systems. Why, they asked. No need for this! But Sega did it and NES had to keep up, and did with the SNES.

I worry that without the competition, the console people would sit on their laurels and us consumers would suffer for it.

I wouldn't completely discount what he says. I notice the same trend with Nvidia and AMD GPUs. Seems to be too much to be coincidence.

Johnny Novgorod:
I don't know if the Switch counts as Gen 9... it's basically a Wii U with a more versatile portable gimmick. Maybe Gen 8.5?

and the PS4 is is basically a PS1 with prettier graphics and a touchpad on the controller...

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here