It hasn't been settled though. The OP doesn't acknowledge the Dreamcast as part of the 6th generation because it doesn't fit into his argument.

The first generation listed only has one machine. It was really the proto-generation of video games before the pong machines. So it really does not count. Also, it was not the biggest selling pong machine, so the thread is wrong..

The second generation, in which Wikipedia lumps all classic consoles, was really two generations. So of course the Atari 2600 was weaker than many of the machines that came after it. But it was more powerful than the machines that hit the market at the same time, the Fairchild Chanel F and the RCA Studio II (which is not in the Wikipedia gallery but actually made it to market AFTER the Atari 2600). So the thread is wrong here too.

Mike from Morgantown

topic = win

Who said i didn't acknowlege it. Is it my fault that the Dreamcast is the Only system that was disconinued a full year before all it's competitors arrived on the market? The only place it lasted was Japan. Even though it was still in stock in 2002, there were in the middle of phasing it out. It was doomed before the GC and the Xbox launched.

The problem in that is you've failed to show how a console being phased out before it's competitors come to market is relevant to your original argument. I don't see the connection here. If you acknowledge it's part of the 6th generation, then why won't you acknowledge it's the 6th generation's weakest processor?

Have to agree. "The console with the weakest processor always wins" is not the same with "The most powerful console has yet to win a generation".

5th gen: The best system was the Playstation, sure it was no match to the 64's 3D engine or most of the Saturn's 2D games, but...

1. It was the only console that offered developers the built-in video decoder, this made easy putting FMVs in the game, it was the only console at the time to do that really well, and it was one of the features that made Final Fantasy VII the game that brought the series into the mainstream... While the Saturn had a lot of problems with FMVs, and the N64 cartridges didn't have enough space for them, Playstation became the 1st option for games with cutscenes and stories to tell...

2. Sound: CDs stored high quality sound, as opposed to cartridges, so the 64 was not a match here, and the PS handled the sound better than the Saturn...

3. Complexity: Developers started to make more complex games with the new freedom of 600 MB discs and they didn't had to stop in making one because the CDs production costs were a lot cheaper than cartridges, that was the main reason Square broke paths with Nintendo... And 3D + discs in the Playstation was better than 3D + discs on the Saturn...

That's why the PS offered the best of both worlds (64 and Saturn) and developers followed, the rest is history...

Yeah so all Nintendo need to do next generation is release a console-edition of their original GameBoy hardware, and they'll be the winners again! Guaranteed. :p

No, but in all seriousness, it IS a weird trend.

Hm....I guess that's true, but then again, I wouldn't rule out the possibility that the strongest console on the market will just so happen to win at any given generation. (could be THIS one, cuz PS3's gonna wreak havoc with its titles this and next year)

But in the end, who cares?  It depends on what you're looking for in a game, whether it's gameplay, graphics, story, etc.  That's the console that wins with you.