Considering that a few threads and articles have arisen on this forum and the internet in regards to the next-gen status of the Wii U, I feel that now is a good time to ask:

What makes a console "next-gen"?

Now on the outset this may seem rather simple - it's just a successor to a main stream console, right? But what if the successor shows little improvement over existing consoles?

Here are two examples of articles debating the generational status of the Wii U.

However I think this argument shouldn't be about the Wii U but about the term in general:

1) Does release date determine gen?
1ii) Does hardware determine gen
1iii) Is it a mix of the above?

2) Do consoles even determine gen or is it the game engines?

3) Are PC's involed with gen in anyway?

4) Do we, or will we, have to start considering tablets/smartphones as being part of gaming gen?

5) Do we even need the label of gen?

And remember:

Keep all debate polite, reasonable and within the realms of logic. This thread has been given the go ahead by Kantor so please refrain from using the phrases flame/troll bait etc. 

If someone states that a console you own may not be part of the gen you think it is, that doesn't mean said console is inferior or a poor purchasing decision. What ultimately matters is that you enjoy the console you own. 

That's a lot of difficult to answer questions. I remember the 2nd gen which had Atari 2600 ('77) but also included much more powerful systems that came out much later like intellivision ('80) and ColecoVision ('82) or used completely different tech like Vectex. It wasn't until the fourth gen that consoles started falling into a five-year cycle.

I don't think time can be an indicator of gen then. I think generations are more based on systems that do things that previous systems simply couldn't. Normally this is determined by tech jumps. 8bit, 16 bit, 32 bit, 64 bit.... but I don't think anyone would dispute Wii introduced tech that wasn't possible earlier (cost wise anyway) despite being underpowered compared to 360/PS3.

Going by that standard, I lump WiiU in with Move&Kinect as mid-gen enhancements rather than the start of a new gen. With the introduction of Move/Kinect and WiiU all three competitors now became even offering both motion and HD graphics. Of course then there's the issue of the gamepad. But a second screen was already done in the previous gen (DS) so it can't really be considered a tech level not previously possible. Indeed Nintendo at one point considered the dual screen idea for Wii before coming across the Wiimote tech.

So tech-wise there is truly nothing next-gen about WiiU. It's just a very late entry into the Seventh gen. I think this is how history will percieve it. Of course I'm on record as saying WiiU will have a short life and be replaced by 2016 which would be Nintendo's eighth gen system.

Marketing wise Nintendo will absolutely sell WiiU as next-gen but EA is on record as considering last gen and most likely other developers will consider it like-wise. Mainly because there'll be such a big leap in power and other systems will (most likely) also have some touch pad or touch screen ability (just not to WiiU's level).

PC's are ever evolving and are never considered as part of a gen. Tablets with their yearly revisions fall into that same camp.

Android consoles like Ouya?? To early to tell. If Ouya gets regular upgrades in power like a tablet (could happen at such a low price point) then I'd say no. However having Android as a base for all sorts of new consoles we could also see 2-3 new Android consoles/Gaming tablets released yearly with progressively better tech and higher OS. Again that gets muddled for defining gen. They could all be lumped into Gen eight like the huge variety of systems that come out at all different times were in gen two. Or just considered something else.

The final point I'll make is the seventh gen may in fact be the last console gen. How can I say this? Because PS4/720 may be so multi-media they they themselves may not be considered true gaming consoles but yet another media device capable of playing games (like PCs, tablets, smartphones, etc.) Historically at least.

I'm sure we'll see WiiU/PS4/720/Ouya?? comparison sales charts on this site by end of year and for us in the here and now, that's all that counts.

both power and capabilities like motion controls or touch screens define a console gen. because we are not talking about PCs which are 100% about power we are talking about consoles which are about innovating gameplay. so yeah i do consider the WiiU to be next gen because of its gameplay advancements with the touch pad thing

And what if said successor is no more powerful then pre-existing consoles? With that idea if the next-box contaimed a hamster and straw, it's still 8th gen.

But why does motion controls or touch pad define a console as being next gen if those ideas do not become wide-spread?

For example the wii may have introduced motion controls, but as far as core gaming goes, motion controls have not, and do not look like they will be considered an improvement over existing technology. The complexity with saying new hardware defines a new gen is that you have to then consider the eyetoy. That didn't make the PS2 next gen...

I'll go with a simple definition: If it is the successor of a current gen system (not a new revision of the system!) it is a next-gen system. Yes, regardless of power.

So then a next-box containing a 1khz CPU and 1kb ram would be 8th gen?

A considerable leap in power/efficiency in comparison to it's predecessor.

If it presents enough new qualities over its own predecessors, then it is a next gen console. For example, if Sony or Nintendo released a console with only SNES capabilities (this doesn't mean only graphics-wise) for their next console, I don't think anyone would consider it "next-gen." This is just an extreme example but you get the idea. Time of release isn't the only factor.

Sony has to deem the console worthy of the "Next-Gen" moniker.

Serious answer: It has to be the successor to the Companies last-gen system. Graphics don't really matter. (Although an upgrade to them is likely.)

It would mean the end of the Xbox brand, but yes. IMO it would be next gen. To bring an insultingly simple yet very understandable example: If your son/daughter were weaker than you they would still be your children. -> Next generation