The_Liquid_Laser said:
It matters to me, because I think it helps make predictions and accurate analysis. For example, I am predicting that PS5+Series X will sell significantly less than PS4+XB1. Why? Because I think a lot of those sales are going to the Switch instead. I am viewing generations as describing meaningful phenomena and not just an arbitrary way of categorizing things. Now, if PS5+Series X sells about the same as PS4+XB1, then I will have to reevaluate my thinking. That is just basic scientific reasoning. But if my prediction is correct, then my view is the most logical explanation, that Switch is a Generation 9 system competing with the other Generation 9 systems. Again, that is just basic scientific reasoning. |
Didn't we do this already or was that someone else?
At any rate, that's not really scientific reasoning... You're skipping from observation (XBoxX and PS5 sole more/less than their predecessors) to your explanation (Switch caused/didn't cause the decrease) without actually justifying why that's the explanation. There are many other possible reasons why they may do better or worse than their predecessors.
Moreover, how does calling Switch a gen 9 console help you make a prediction? If the word generation never entered the gaming lexicon, and we simply evaluated how systems will compete or not compete based on factors such as marketing, price point, features, and specs, would your prediction be any different? If not, what is generation adding to the conversation?
Last edited by JWeinCom - on 02 August 2020
