Capcom: The Next Gen Doesn't Start With Wii U

[GhaudePhaede010]

happydolphin said:

Roma said:

happydolphin said:
I've posted this before and got shat on all over by Rol and Viper. The Wii was not even considered next gen by its own leader (Hiroshi Yamauchi), so this is no surprise to me.

Gens are rooted in the concept of technical advancements requiring changes to a console, things that could not be done before. That isn't the case for the WiiU, wasn't the case for the Wii.

how do you know what WiiU can do? did any other console before Wii have motion controls?

The only way you can argue that Wii was next gen using the definition I gave is by considering the affordability of the parts used in the Wii (the argument is almost identical for the U).

Otherwise, the Wii is as much next gen as if you took an N64 with no analog stick and added an analog stick, in that the innovation didn't require technical advancements that were out of reach, only something that required thought and enginuity, and the idea. That's not next gen imho.

Okay, there is much incorrect with your argument.

Since video gaming has the word, "gaming" in it, that means and expresses there is interaction. To deny interaction as a means of generational advancement is both assanine and ignorant. Here is why I say that:

NES to SNES to Nintendo 64 to Gamecube to Wii to now WiiU all have very different functioning controllers that lead to new ways of interaction with games. This is a TECHNOLOGICAL leap and therefore, a generational leap. That is not, I repeat, NOT a disputed fact.

Imagine playing SNES games with an NES controller. Something like Street Fighter would be... irratic (as it was on Game Boy) and see very little, if any success at all. Interface progressions are just as, if not more important (speaking from a sales and influencial perspective on this) than your more, "traditional" graphical leaps.

Even PS1 to PS2 to PS3 has controller advancements and same with XBOX to XBOX 360 (at least I think so) even if they are small advancements.

The problem is - and this is a first for thee industry - Wii gave us a large inteface leap at thee expense of large graphical leaps while thee HD consoles gave us large graphical leaps with minimal interface leaps (pre Move and Kinect). To be honest, Wii is very much part of this generation because of its contribution to thee other two consoles alone. Not to mention the boost in life these new interfaces gave to thee HD consoles (sales and appeal), it is obvious that technological innovation in the form of interface is very much a generational progression.

This is why your argument is totally off base. Yes, it would be nice to have both as part of a generational leap, but it is obvious in the way of sales, advertising, influence, and actual game play mechanics/interface, that what Nintendo did was create as much a generational leap (albeit in a different direction) as both Sony and Microsoft. It is time the world looks on Nintendo in this way. What they contributed to gaming with Wii, DS, and WiiU are steps forward for thee industry. Obviously, these consoles have earned their titles as, "next generation."