The analogy is fine because you're arguing about the US President like he's the only politician in the world the are many Presidents of different countries, the comapnies in this case are the countries and their leading politician is the platform so yes the analogy is perfectly fine.

It's not fine because politicians from other countries have zero correlation to "48th president". It's the equivelent of "9th Nintendo Console" not "9th generation" so yes it's a bad analogy. It is a number that refers to ONE individual from ONE country, so it can't be used as an analogy for a number that refers to MULTIPLE consoles from MULTIPLE companies.

What the hell are you on about PS5? It would be a 9th gen platform like Switch as PS5 is the successor to PS4 this part of your post isn't coherant, generation is not industry wide as many have tricked themselves into believing it's individual for the platform, Switch is a 9th gen platform so will PS5. Even your argument about 6th, 7th blah blah contradicts you as these were triggered by one platform releasing first forcing a reaction much like I mentioned earliar also note how you skipped previous generations to try and help your argument.

And there we go, theres the nail in the (successor is always +1 generation") coffin. If Sony didn't release there PS5 till 2030 it would still be a 9th gen machine? Because it is still the successor to an 8th gen machine after all. Or maybe now you realise that adding a number on for a release isn't a valid definition for an INDUSTRY-WIDE GENERATION, and yes it is industry-wide not individual for a platform/company. Because a generation has to refer to multiple devices as they are groups categorizing all consoles across the industry into a shared generation. You say it's not industry wide then claim in the same paragraph later that one console can force a next generation for everyone else. The 1st-8th console generations specifically refer to generations of console in the INDUSTRY, unlike your president analogy which again refers to a singular country or in console terms, company.

No shit a generation is a group of consoles now here's news for you they don't all need to release in synch, if Nintendo released a successor in 2020 as unlikely as that what if argument you're trying to push is yes it would be a 10 gen platform after all Megadrive did just that.

A console generation is always made up of multiple devices, the next release is +1 when it comes to 8th/9th gen etc is a completely flawed definition due to this, as depending on release schedule you could quickly end up with generations containing only one console.

I think for the most part, the "generations" are defined by which consoles spent the most time competing against each other in the retail space.  -snip- I don't think the question can definitively be answered until Sony or Microsoft release their own successor console.  Only then will it be clear which "group" of systems Switch will spend the most time sharing retail space with.

The analogy is fine because you're arguing about the US President like he's the only politician in the world the are many Presidents of different countries, the comapnies in this case are the countries and their leading politician is the platform so yes the analogy is perfectly fine.

What the hell are you on about PS5? It would be a 9th gen platform like Switch as PS5 is the successor to PS4 this part of your post isn't coherant, generation is not industry wide as many have tricked themselves into believing it's individual for the platform, Switch is a 9th gen platform so will PS5. Even your argument about 6th, 7th blah blah contradicts you as these were triggered by one platform releasing first forcing a reaction much like I mentioned earliar also note how you skipped previous generations to try and help your argument.

No shit a generation is a group of consoles now here's news for you they don't all need to release in synch, if Nintendo released a successor in 2020 as unlikely as that what if argument you're trying to push is yes it would be a 10 gen platform after all Megadrive did just that.

If Sony, MS, and Nintendo all released new consoles in 2021 (highly unlikely, but this is just a hypothetical), would you consider them all 10th gen, or the Switch 2 10th and the PS5/X2 9th? If the former, then that would imply syncing is at least somewhat relevant to what generation you're in. If the latter, then generations being groups starts to break down (and dissolves into absurdity if you take it a step further).

I should note i do consider the Switch to be a 9th gen system, but i'm struggling to follow where you draw the line for generations. It doesn't really matter (i don't think the idea of generations is particularly useful anymore), but i'm curious nonetheless.

Replies in bold, you seem to think that the be-all and end-all of which generation a console is in is simply adding 1 onto the generation of whatever systems it is the successor to, which is a completely flawed way of thinking, what if Sega released a Dreamcast successor, would that be part of the 7th generation? If that's not the case then if you could clarrify your actual defintion of a generation that would be Swell. There has to be a defintion for why a particular set of consoles is grouped together in a generation.

That question is answered already, if they all released a new platform at the same time they wouldn't be the same gen because Switch 2 would be 10th gen, gens in how you and others are arguing in how they are defined were already absurd to begin with, they were never uniform to begin with it just appeared that way because companies were reacting to their competitor's moves.

Your posts don't make much sense, if Generations are truly independant then why was Nintendo's first console not a "1st generation" machine? The reason is because generations are defined in relation to competing devices.

You're saying that a Switch 2 and a PS5/XBO2 launching on the same day wouldn't be the same generation? Crazy man, crazy.

They had consoles before the NES they were was Atari machines in gen 1 and 2, NES was their 3rd gen machine :/

Fine then let's take Sony, why is PS1 a 5th generation console, or XBOX a 6th generation console?

Generations in terms of 1st-8th are an industry-wide category not individual to each company.

Good point although it can be seen as a 5th gen platform seeing as it's not succeeding any previous platform and was released to compete with 5th gen consoles in the long run of it's life same with Xbox, once a staple in the market their successors are seen as succeeding platforms from that gen making the successor Gen 6 or 7 in the Xbox's case. To give you an example on how the is no defined gen setting EA count the NES as Gen 1 and they're a big industry publisher.

I'm curious as to which generation you'd put a successor to the dreamcast, should one suddenly crawl it's way out of the ether, would you put that in the 7th generation with PS3/360?

A successor device is always that particular companies "next-generation" device, but that's not what 1st-8th generations refer to, those are generations of devices defined by there peers via a common time.

Correct me if I'm wrong but there has never been a case where a new console has launched and been placed in a previous generation. A brand-new 4th generation console has never launched after a 5th generation device has released or similair right? That's because generations are defined by time, it's impossible to release a console in a past generation.