HappySqurriel on 01 October 2008
| RolStoppable said: You could organize generations by what is changing the industry and what is sustaining and building on the previous sets of rules. The first generation would include everything from the first Pong machines to the Atari 2600 and its competitors. All these systems were seen as natural progress of the industry. The second generation would start with the NES, because the industry experienced a drastic change at that time. Everyone was predicting that home computers would be the future and consoles would be dead, yet the opposite became reality. The NES's success went against convential wisdom and the "truth" of the industry at its time. This generation includes all following systems up until the 360 and PS3. The third generation starts with the Wii which is again going against the "truth" of this industry and was predicted to fail based on the established set of rules which reach back to the NES. So in summary, to say it with leo-j's words: Wii = best! |
I thought about a very similar organization when I was trying to group consoles together based on what it means to be a 'Gamer' for a particular system ...
There really was a seperation in what "Gamer" meant before the industry collapse of 1983 and after the industry was revived with the NES and this definition persisted until the Saturn/Playstation were released. What it means to be a 'Gamer' in relation to the Wii is much different than what it meant before hand.
