All right, how about a different angle:

How would you define "current gen"? Or more specifically, when does "current gen" start?

Id say that the current generation is the generation in its prime.

When the next gen consoles start outselling the current gen consoles, then I will start to call them the "current gen".

The time between generations is more a transitional phase. A passing of the torch so to say. Look at the problems Nintendo had with 3DS. They were struggling to transition into the new generation, though eventually they made the step and made 3DS successful. The 3DS is now outselling the DS and development of videogames has pretty much fully moved over to 3DS.

current gen would obviously be the more prominant one at the current time. There would be no specific starting point. It would be dependant on all three. If Nintendo launched the Wii U a year after the Wii and killed the Wii it would be hard to convince me thats either 7th or 8th gen. (for nintendo specifically it would be one or the other but not industry standard wise).

But what if the next gen consoles in say early 2014 haven't started to outsell PS360Wii just yet, but people's minds are all focused on them - the developers, media, the gamers, forum-goers - wouldn't you feel it is "current gen" then?

Profits are important for any company. However, using it as a measure of dominance is absolutly ridiculous. The more accurate way of deciding would be through revenue if you were to measure monatary wise. After all that shows where consumers are willing to put their money and at what price. But thats ridiculous also. Each business is ran differently and emphasizes different practices. You can't determine a winner through profits unless there was a standard for each company. If a company is willing to lose money to sell more than thats their prerogative.

As for companies not caring about sales after the launch of their new system? I hope to god you never run a business with that mind set. Scraps? yeah I'm sure the 50mil more ps2's sony sold they didn't care about. Thats more than either company sold while they were in their prime last gen. Thats definatly scraps to me. As for them not caring? Oh yeah, I'm sure they don't care about potential future ps4 adopters. They would rather those people not buy the their system.

I know there are multiple angles to this, and much like human generations you could say that a console generation is never really over since it exists in the history books, but to me personally it feels like the current gen is already almost completely over.

I might not personally own a PS4 within even one year from now, but my mind is so much set on the next-gen that my PS3 and current gen titles just feel kinda old and obsolete. Whenever I launch my PS3 I wonder what the PS4 interface and dashboard will look like. I really want to experience critically acclaimed games like AC3, Dishonored and Bioshock Infinity but in my mind they already feel "old". Not bad in any way, just something from a past era.

I don't want to feel like this, but I still do lol.

Like I said, it would be a transitional phase. You could call them either Next Gen or Current Gen.

To the majority, they would still be next gen, as the majority wouldnt be buying them. In all honesty it would depend on the person. If youre yet to transition to PS4 then you would still be in your current gen. You wouldnt be in the next gen. If youve already moved to PS4 then someone elses "next gen" would be your "current gen".

Where did this debate even come from? The point I was making was that just becuse a new generation starts, the old one doesnt end.

Yeah, I forgot that the term "next-gen" lived on through until at least 2010 while still refering to PS360.

I dunno where it came from.

NES production went from 1983-2003 in Japan. Sony copies Nintendo.

So we were in the transition period for 3rd generation up till 2003 in Japan right? NES production in Japan 1983-2003.