By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
JWeinCom on 10 June 2020
Edit Thread
The_Liquid_Laser said:
JWeinCom said:

I don't think that's an apt analogy.

With the concept of generations we're not talking about a principle.  We're simply talking about categorization.  Whether we call the Switch an 8th generation console, a 9th generation console, or abandon the concept altogether, it doesn't change anything about how gaming actually works.  Whatever generation we consider the Switch should have no bearing on how we predict the gaming market will play out.

What is objective is that the Switch launched several years after the PS4 and XBox One and its processing capabilities are not on par with them.  Those underlying facts really don't change based on what generation you consider the Switch to be.  On the other hand, people were actually under a grave misunderstanding of the facts when it came to the housing markets.  

If I'm hearing you right, it sounds like you never really believed in console generations to begin with.  Perhaps that is the disagreement?

I tend to think generations are more than a categorization.  They actually help describe sales behavior.  The Genesis launched in the US around the height of the NES's popularity.  It didn't affect NES sales at all.  But the Genesis had a huge impact on SNES sales.  The concept of generations is what explains this phenomenon.  

It depends what you mean by believed in.

I think it is (or at least was) a useful tool for categorizing things.  The way that at least Nintendo is doing business right now, I don't think it's useful anymore, at least in regards to their products.

What is the purpose of debating whether the Switch is a 9th or 8th generation system?  How does this improve our understanding of the market?  Does it help us to make predictions?