SpokenTruth said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:
The Atari 5200 was meant to be a next generation console. It was the successor to the Atari 2600, and it was released 5 years later. It was the successor to Atari's first console in the same way that the SNES, PS2 and XBox360 were considered successors to their companies' first consoles. It is thrown in with generation 2, because it is hard to classify consoles around the video game crash.
And this should be a reality check on how we understand generations. If our definition depends on generation 2 and 3, then we need to seriously rethink our definition of generation. Generations 2 and 3 was the most unusual time in console history because of the video game crash (and also generation 1 was really weird too). Why not base our definition from generations 4 - 8? That should be where our understanding of generation comes from before we try to explain the special cases from generations 1 - 3.
In the typical cases, a company releases a console and then 4 - 7 years later they release a successor. That is the next generation. That is the standard situation where you don't have a crash or a horrible failure like the Virtual Boy. Why define things based on the special cases instead of the typical situation?
|
Because it's not defined by either. I just told you how the industry defines it.
|
Switch is meant to succeed both the Wii U and 3DS as defined by Nintendo. That makes it next gen. It is a generation 9 system.
