I meant to say that I am in agreement with you.

Not a news, still it's the console that got more interesting exclusives and innovative IP's.

Then I think it's pretty clear you do not understand his quote to begin with.   He's not saying that next gen = cutting edge.   He's saying it's pointless to release a next gen console that is cutting edge if consumers aren't looking for cutting edge.  And Wii validated that position.   Largely, he's berating analysts, media and vocal consumers that are just rambling on about everybody must release a cutting edge console with every new generation.   And again, he validated his position with the Wii.  

Viper, it's not what he's saying. It's what you understand him to say. But the text is black on white that, at the time, and in his mind, and in the leadership's view, Next gen was synonym to cutting edge, at least for the most important players of the industry.

It had always been that way, would remain that way.

The quote again:

"Only people who do not know the videogame business would advocate the release of next-generation machines when people are not interested in cutting-edge technologies."

To advocate next-gen machines, in his view, is to advocate cutting edge technologies, which is in his view not what the market really wanted. They go hand in hand in the quote.

Listen, I understand your PoV. I just want us to look at things objectively and in this specific case look at what Yamauchi is saying. If your definition differs from his, by all means say so. But when the quote is white on black, why are we putting words in his mouth?

If you want to look at things objectively, then learn Japanese and read the original quote and not the English translation that is IGN's point of view of his statement.

Are you saying you understand Japanese and that's what you understood from the quote?

All I'm asking for is a minimum of effort and intellectual integrity, and for some reason I'm not getting that.

No, I don't.  But you aksed me to stay completely objective and not 'interpret' his statement to how I understand it.  The problem is that IGN themselves had to interpret his statement because it was orginally a Japanese interview.   So you are asking me to remain objective on a subjective translation.

Further than that, I have been giving you a viewpoint that is shared by Nintendo, the media and the industry as a whole. I have broken down the subtext of the quote.   I have given a history on the context of the quote.   And you're asking me to ignore everything and accept a statement that is both a Japanese to English translation and is under the context of marketing and not the context of generational categorization.

Do I need to point out that IGN quoted him as saying E3 was in Las Vegas rather than Los Angeles where it actually took place?  The question is, did he actually say Las Vegas or did IGN translate what he said as Las Vegas when he really said LA?   Which is my point...how objective can you be with IGN's translation?

And if you want to take things so damn literal, as you are tryign to make me do, we can say the whole damn thing is irrelevant because nobody showed any new gen or next gen consoles at any E3 convention in 2004 in Las Vegas.

I'd also like to take note your statement that, "Nintendo lacked vision in stripping its Wii console of next-gen graphics."  Keeping on the literal context of things here, they never stripped Wii of 'next gen graphics' because Wii never had any graphics capabilites stripped away.  Fact is, it actually had graphics capability added to it after that interview took place.

I understand where you're coming from, there are problems in japanese to english translation. Why this strictly applies to the articles I provide raises a big question mark for me, when many other threads are based off of japanese to english translated material.

You raise good points, but your applying them to this article and not seeing this applied to others makes me question the sincerity of the critique.

As for the Wii being stripped away, let me reword that in the OP.

I question the validty of every tranlsation.  The fact I didn't point that out in thsi instance is irrelvent to our discussion.  You demanded I take his statement as literally as possible to be objective when the statement itself is not e3ven his own words.  Regardless of the validity of other Japanese to English translations, it is of the utmost import in this matter.

You cannot ask me to be purely objective and accept his statement literally and apply it from a marketing standpoint to a generational categorical standpoint without questioning the legitimacy of the translation and the intent of the speaker.  Basically, you are asking me to be a sheep with no facility for critical thinking.

On the contrary, I want you to be critical. My concern was that you were blaming the translation difficulties for fitting the quote into your own preconception of the term gen, what the Wii was intended to be, and the usual Nintendo fan PoV.

I was actually trying to invite you and others to be critical of themselves and shake the foundations of their PoV, never the opposite. Can't you see that?