Dragon007 said:
Xponent said:
Dragon007 said:
Xponent said:
Dragon007 said:
That's actually not true.
The Super Nintendo was more advanced than the Mega Drive/Genesis
The PSX was more powerful than the Saturn and in some ways it was technologically superior to the N64.
The PS2 was more advanced than the Dreamcast.
It's actually always the guy in the middle.
I guess that means the 360 will win this generation? Yeah right... |
It's not always the guy in the middle. NES, Gameboy, and for the current generation the Wii and DS contradict your claim. In any case, the most powerful console has never dominated. The SNES is the only example of the most powerful console winning a generation, but for the most part, it was a in close race with the Genesis. Based on history, it makes more sense to release an underpowered machine. Powerful consoles are generally released later and are more expensive the competition which is always a considerable handicap. In the case of the SNES, Nintendo had the advantage of it's dominance and popularity from the previous generation, and yet it still managed to lose significant marketshare. |
In the examples I gave, yes, it was always the guy in the middle. From the SNES to the PS2. In the SNES era it was between the Genesis and the Jaguar. In the PSX era, it was between the Saturn and the N64. In the PS2 era there wasn't really a middle guy since there were 4 consoles. Basically the PS2 and the Gamcube were in the middle together. With handhelds you may have a point, but not with home consoles. |
No, I think I do have a point with respect to home consoles. The NES was technically inferior to the Master System. Likewise, the Wii is the weakest of the current generation and is likely to dominate. There is no mysterious law by which consoles in the middle are destined to win the race. It is the consequence of a multitude of factors. I also disagree with your claim that the Jaguar was from the SNES/Genesis genration of consoles. |
Again, I was referring to the last 3 generations. The SNES, PSX and the PS2 were all middle guys. The Wii is a great success, but it just passed its first birthday, i'm not going to declare any winners for this gen just yet. And yes I agree, there is no mysterious law that determines a winner, i'm just pointing out that it happened more often than not. Bold: The Atari Jaguar was competing against the SNES/Genesis. It wasn't very good competition, but it was competition nonetheless. |
The PS1 and the Saturn also competed with the SNES. In fact, the SNES outsold them both for the first year of release similar to how the PS2 is still competitive with the HD consoles. Nevertheless, it is common knowledge that the SNES was of an earlier generation.
How do you distinguish between generations I wonder? The Jaguar arrived alongside machines like the 3DO, CDi, CD32 and Pippin, all of which had more in common with the Saturn and Playstation than the Genesis and SNES. Unlike the 16 bit Genesis and SNES, these consoles used 32 bit technology and were CD based from the get go. In fact Atari promoted the Jaguar as a 64 bit console. According to Wikipedia at least, the Jaguar is regarded as part of the fifth generation which of course included the Saturn, PS1 and N64.
What is the basis of your claim that the Jaguar was a part of the SNES/Genesis generation of gaming?
