Is nintendo the winner of the 8th gen or the 9th gen?

[angrypoolman]

160rmf said:

angrypoolman said:

first of all, the argument you made was that since something is a successor, it belongs in the next generation. that is the single point that i aimed to dispel. so if you want to make the point that switch is 9th gen, you will need something better than that because i objectively disproved that line of reasoning.

second, the comparison is the two consoles that are released in the same generation, so we arent pairing switch and switch 2, we are pairing switch and wii u. the comparison is that there are two 2nd gen consoles (2600 and 5200) and two 8th gen consoles (wii u and switch). and i will reiterate the point i made earlier is that the reason that is even possible in the first place is because for you to be able to release two consoles in a single generation, at least one of them had to have been a failure. and that is the case in both situations. 

so if you want to make further responses about this, make sure to keep track of the argument and make sure to address the actual points being made. 

Fair enough, I really didn't develop my reasoning, so here is that:

Atari 5200 is more comparable to virtual boy than it is to Wii U.

Virtual Boy and Atari 5200 were flukes that were released to die, their developers gave no effort to maintain them in relevance. Their lifetime were insignificant 

Meanwhile Wii U and GameCube despite being comercial failures, they were treated as main systems by Nintendo, they received support with many huge exclusives and their lifespan were significant enough to mark their presence on their respective generations, so you cant just scratch that with its successor just bc it didn't match your arbitary parameters.

you can say its more comparable to virtual boy, i mean i feel like virtual boy has nothing to do with this.

the basic thing being discussed is this: is it possible to have two consoles from the same company in the same generation. i think clearly the answer is yes. i can imagine scenarios which this would be the case, but we dont even have to go there because we have actual real examples. 2600 and 5200 is clear. 5200, although it failed, was meant to be a successor. the fact that it was hardly supported doesnt negate the fact that atari released two consoles in one generation. 

similar thing happened in the 8th generation, but in reverse. nintendo started out with a failed console and replaced it halfway through. let me ask you this, if switch sold the way many predicted when it was about to release, 30, 40, 50 million units tops, how long would it have lasted before it had to be replaced? would that have changed what generation it was a part of?