By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Capcom: The Next Gen Doesn't Start With Wii U

DanneSandin on 05 September 2012
happydolphin said:
I've posted this before and got shat on all over by Rol and Viper. The Wii was not even considered next gen by its own leader (Hiroshi Yamauchi), so this is no surprise to me.

Gens are rooted in the concept of technical advancements requiring changes to a console, things that could not be done before. That isn't the case for the WiiU, wasn't the case for the Wii.

Oh sorry! didn't see a thread about this (most have missed yours) and I thought it would make for some interesting discussion =/



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.

Around the Network
MANUELF on 05 September 2012

I though it started with the 3DS



Viper1 on 05 September 2012
happydolphin said:
Viper1 said:
happydolphin said:
I've posted this before and got shat on all over by Rol and Viper. The Wii was not even considered next gen by its own leader (Hiroshi Yamauchi), so this is no surprise to me.

Gens are rooted in the concept of technical advancements requiring changes to a console, things that could not be done before. That isn't the case for the WiiU, wasn't the case for the Wii.

Console generations are not defined, nor have they ever been, by the changes in spec increases but by the chronological relationship between successor and predecessor flagship consoles.  Increases in tech specs have only historically coincided with new generations but were never a requirement not a means to categorize as which generation a console belonged to.

Look at the first jump in gens, it was due to the need to upgrade the previous entries due to memory limitations. Look it up, it's in the history of videogames on wikipedia.


@In earnest. I don't think we can be sure that's what he meant then, and neither can we be sure the understanding of OP is what he meant. So either way we're at a loss.

As I stated, spec increases have historically accompanied a new generation simply because newer specs were aviable at market prices.  But it was never the specs that truly established what a generation was.   Many generations had similar specs because that was what the market offered at a price they could sell it for.

But they have always been about the successor/predecessor relationship of flagship consoles.   The decreased empahsis on specs over the past 2 generations has validated what I'm saying.

 

And it's pretty obvious what Tsujimoto meant in his statement if you'd read the actual quote and not the trimmed down version NintendoLife published:

""Capcom had a couple of passing comments to make about next-generation gaming.

Kenzo Tsujimoto, chairman and CEO, noted: "Furthermore, we must invest in our developers to strengthen foundational research in next-generation consoles."

Hahruhiro Tsujimoto added: "We will create new popular next generation franchise, allocating 20 per cent of development investment to new products through efficient development."

"As for the outlook for the next fiscal year," Capcom went on, "although Nintendo will release the new game console Wii U and the market will be continue to be invigorated by the increase of DLC, time is required before the next generation console cycle begins in earnest."

Trying to read into that as though he doesn't see the Wii U as an 8th generation console is stretching it beyond honest communication deficiencies and laying it out as simply trying to score web site hits.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

JGarret on 05 September 2012

I´m guessing they meant that it´ll take a while (around the end of 2014?) before the next generation kicks into high gear, which is pretty damn obvious.



Roma on 05 September 2012

but EA said it was so who should we believe? :O

the negative news of course *trollface*



    R.I.P Mr Iwata :'(

Around the Network
Roma on 05 September 2012
happydolphin said:
I've posted this before and got shat on all over by Rol and Viper. The Wii was not even considered next gen by its own leader (Hiroshi Yamauchi), so this is no surprise to me.

Gens are rooted in the concept of technical advancements requiring changes to a console, things that could not be done before. That isn't the case for the WiiU, wasn't the case for the Wii.

how do you know what WiiU can do? did any other console before Wii have motion controls?



    R.I.P Mr Iwata :'(

happydolphin on 05 September 2012
Viper1 said:
happydolphin said:
Viper1 said:
happydolphin said:
I've posted this before and got shat on all over by Rol and Viper. The Wii was not even considered next gen by its own leader (Hiroshi Yamauchi), so this is no surprise to me.

Gens are rooted in the concept of technical advancements requiring changes to a console, things that could not be done before. That isn't the case for the WiiU, wasn't the case for the Wii.

Console generations are not defined, nor have they ever been, by the changes in spec increases but by the chronological relationship between successor and predecessor flagship consoles.  Increases in tech specs have only historically coincided with new generations but were never a requirement not a means to categorize as which generation a console belonged to.

Look at the first jump in gens, it was due to the need to upgrade the previous entries due to memory limitations. Look it up, it's in the history of videogames on wikipedia.


@In earnest. I don't think we can be sure that's what he meant then, and neither can we be sure the understanding of OP is what he meant. So either way we're at a loss.

As I stated, spec increases have historically accompanied a new generation simply because newer specs were aviable at market prices.  But it was never the specs that truly established what a generation was.   Many generations had similar specs because that was what the market offered at a price they could sell it for.

But they have always been about the successor/predecessor relationship of flagship consoles.   The decreased empahsis on specs over the past 2 generations has validated what I'm saying.

 

And it's pretty obvious what Tsujimoto meant in his statement if you'd read the actual quote and not the trimmed down version NintendoLife published:

""Capcom had a couple of passing comments to make about next-generation gaming.

Kenzo Tsujimoto, chairman and CEO, noted: "Furthermore, we must invest in our developers to strengthen foundational research in next-generation consoles."

Hahruhiro Tsujimoto added: "We will create new popular next generation franchise, allocating 20 per cent of development investment to new products through efficient development."

"As for the outlook for the next fiscal year," Capcom went on, "although Nintendo will release the new game console Wii U and the market will be continue to be invigorated by the increase of DLC, time is required before the next generation console cycle begins in earnest."

Trying to read into that as though he doesn't see the Wii U as an 8th generation console is stretching it beyond honest communication deficiencies and laying it out as simply trying to score web site hits.

Fair enough for the interpretation part. It is a stretch now I see it.

But your argument is a stretch in the definition of a generation, and as far as I'm concerned history has dictated the need for new consoles due to hardware limitations. The rest is adaptation.



happydolphin on 05 September 2012
Roma said:
happydolphin said:
I've posted this before and got shat on all over by Rol and Viper. The Wii was not even considered next gen by its own leader (Hiroshi Yamauchi), so this is no surprise to me.

Gens are rooted in the concept of technical advancements requiring changes to a console, things that could not be done before. That isn't the case for the WiiU, wasn't the case for the Wii.

how do you know what WiiU can do? did any other console before Wii have motion controls?

The only way you can argue that Wii was next gen using the definition I gave is by considering the affordability of the parts used in the Wii (the argument is almost identical for the U).

Otherwise, the Wii is as much next gen as if you took an N64 with no analog stick and added an analog stick, in that the innovation didn't require technical advancements that were out of reach, only something that required thought and enginuity, and the idea. That's not next gen imho.



Viper1 on 05 September 2012
happydolphin said:
Viper1 said:

As I stated, spec increases have historically accompanied a new generation simply because newer specs were aviable at market prices.  But it was never the specs that truly established what a generation was.   Many generations had similar specs because that was what the market offered at a price they could sell it for.

But they have always been about the successor/predecessor relationship of flagship consoles.   The decreased empahsis on specs over the past 2 generations has validated what I'm saying.

 

And it's pretty obvious what Tsujimoto meant in his statement if you'd read the actual quote and not the trimmed down version NintendoLife published:

""Capcom had a couple of passing comments to make about next-generation gaming.

Kenzo Tsujimoto, chairman and CEO, noted: "Furthermore, we must invest in our developers to strengthen foundational research in next-generation consoles."

Hahruhiro Tsujimoto added: "We will create new popular next generation franchise, allocating 20 per cent of development investment to new products through efficient development."

"As for the outlook for the next fiscal year," Capcom went on, "although Nintendo will release the new game console Wii U and the market will be continue to be invigorated by the increase of DLC, time is required before the next generation console cycle begins in earnest."

Trying to read into that as though he doesn't see the Wii U as an 8th generation console is stretching it beyond honest communication deficiencies and laying it out as simply trying to score web site hits.

Fair enough for the interpretation part. It is a stretch now I see it.

But your argument is a stretch in the definition of a generation, and as far as I'm concerned history has dictated the need for new consoles due to hardware limitations. The rest is adaptation.

Not only is my definition of a generation not a stretch, it's not even mine.  It's accepted by the majority of the industry itself.  That's where I got it from.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

happydolphin on 05 September 2012
Viper1 said:

Not only is my definition of a generation not a stretch, it's not even mine.  It's accepted by the majority of the industry itself.  That's where I got it from.

You hate the industry for doing one thing? I hate it for doing another. Facts are facts (history), interpretation of facts is another, and the definition used for a generation by the industry fails.