By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mazty on 25 October 2012
Edit Thread
S.Peelman said:
Mazty said:
S.Peelman said:

They are though.

Think the Wii, PS3 and X360 are the only 7th gen consoles?

What about the HyperScan by Mattel, or the Zeebo? Or the Atari Flashback even? Sure, one has N64 graphics, the other SNES and the last is a 2600 clone, but they're still all 7th Gen. Time is the only deciding factor.

Even then, the WiiU kills PS360, so the only relevant comparison anyway would be against PS4720. Which can't even do yet.


The Wii U kills the PS360 because it's CPU is weaker? Okaydokey. Why consider the WIIU next gen when it's launching with the 360 and PS3 still selling and launching with equivalent power? Why is it simply not just a late contender within the 7th gen?

If time is the only factor, and hardware isn't considered, then how come each iteration of the PS3 is not considered another generation? You're argument breaks down at this point. 

Ignoring the CPU type rumours, all we think we know is that the WiiU's CPU 'supposedly' has a 'relatively' low clock speed.

Low clock speed =/= weak.

Also, please don't grasp at straws with the generation argument. There is no argument. PS3slim or any other that falls in that category is called a 'redesign'. Exactly the same device in another plastic case. Nothing else, it is not a successor to the PS3, it is the PS3. You would only have a point if both were marketed as a different device. I.e. the slim would be called PS4. This is true for every console out there, power is not a deciding factor when successor consoles are involved.


Low clock speed + that form factor = weak. 

You said hardware doesn't matter & that it is only about time, therefore with that logic a redesign is a new generation as we ignore the hardware. 
Now you are saying that the name makes a console next gen. So, care to adjust your argument to what matters is both the name & the time at when it is released?