Should we consider Switch successor as 10th Gen?

[Shtinamin_]

Pemalite said:

Shtinamin_ said:

How did I do? Good? Bad? 

NES is 3rd Gen. Switch is 8th gen.

Remember the Switch may have released in 2017, but it's hardware is from 2015. - XBox One And Playstation 4 dropped in 2013.
A company can release more than 1 device per console generation... Or may even skip a generation.

Atari did it with the Atari 5200 which shared the generation with the 2600.

Playstation 4/Playstation 4 Pro and Xbox One/Xbox One X and Xbox Series S/Series X.

Probably a few more examples out there, but you get the idea.

We can't really go by "years" either... The Original Xbox only existed for 4 years, the Gameboy Advance was only around for 3 years before the DS came... Which really hazards back to my technology definition, console graphics technology tends to be a sort of "eb and flow" with the generations, significant leaps in graphics technology tends to coincide with a viable console successor.

Shtinamin_ said:

I don't think Wiki is the best place for sources. But there is a lot of reasoning why it should be gen 9. So what are the reasons why it should be gen 8?

Wikipedia is perfectly fine.

You can't exactly jump onto wikipedia and start injecting your own views and opinions into articles... That is, unless you have citations.
Which is this annoying little bit of "evidence" to support your articles in wikipedia.

Thus, check the citations in an article to ascertain the veracity of claims.

Thanks :)
I didnt follow years, I just tried to see what console could do whatever tech was in the descriptions you said (but I understand if there were any mistakes).

My reasoning for putting Switch in 9th was because the Switch can anti-alias (I didn't really check the rest).

Ok! I blame American schools for the Wiki hate.

And I agree a gaming company doesnt need to make just one per generation. I think that Switch sold so well that a 9th gen console wasn't necessary.