| Viper1 said:
I agree it's a flawed means of categorization on all fronts but it's one most accepted by the industry itself. Pardon me if I side with them and my own industry (media). |
There's no pardonning, it has nothing to do with you or me. All it is is trying to get to the bottom of something I consider to be a very confusing term that has roots in technological breakthroughs and was converted by an industry to mean something, and people (like you), not letting reason dictate the meaning of a term.
What will you do when what I said happens? When a manufacturer makes 3 consoles by the time another makes just 1 in the span of a traditional generation time period (6 to 10 years)? Will you ignore the first 3? All I'm saying is you can say that's the used term, but you can't say it makes perfect sense.
Whether it's the used term or not in the end doesn't matter, when people say next-gen, what they usually mean is "something that wasn't there before", "at the forefront of technology", within a given context.
With that I think I've said all I needed to say.
