This topic is really just a way for me to try and get the events of the current generation straight, to try and recap what's been going on so far, and figure out how we'll see this generation in retrospect.

Up until this generation, gaming had been relatively harmonious.  Compared to today, the mudslinging between rival console owners, even in a contentious time like the Fourth Generation, was limited due to the fact that Al Gore hadn't invented the internet yet, and would be downright gentlemanly by today's standards.  Between the rise and fall of Atari, then Nintendo, it was always pretty clear who the dominant faction was a year or two into the generation (with the notable exception of the Fourth Generation, which ended in a tie), at which point, gamers, the gaming press and developers alike would get behind the market leader.

Until this generation.

This generation, there is a clear winner.  Perhaps not as much of a clean sweep as it was last generation, but a clear winner nonetheless.  So what do third parties and gamers do?  Third parties throw their table scraps at the market leader, and keep their best efforts on the XBox 360 and PS3, which in the minds of many have been amalgamated into a bloc of sorts.  The old guard of 'core' gamers shuns the market leader, deriding it based on stereotypes, whether perceived or real, of its userbase and who comprises it.  The best way to describe their view of the Wii's fanbase?  "They're not part of our group". No matter what success the Wii achieves, the gaming media, third parties, and 'core' gamers never acknowledge its success, and usually trot out some higher standard for the Wii to achieve before they start taking it seriously.  This cycle inevitably repeats itself every few months as the Wii inevitably meets that higher standard.  Meanwhile, Nintendo runs their Mario branded money printing presses, secure in Fortress Hyrule, having won this round of the console wars with literally the entire deck stacked against them.

What happened to gaming?

According to Nintendo, the death march toward realism was unsustainable, and something had to give if gaming was to continue, which gave rise to the blue ocean strategy.  This led to games being aimed at a new type of gamer, which included (as in, did not exclude) the old, the mothers, and the relatives.  Understandably, among the old guard 'core' gamers, the immediate reaction was to shun these newcomers, who currently equal them in number, simply because the newcomers' perceived tastes did not coincide with that of the old guard.

Conflict was inevitable.

Hence, as this generation has not yet received a clear name yet (as in, 256-bit era, HD era, etc), I propose that there are two names which will be given this generation in retrospect: If the stereotype of Wii gamers being 'casual' is less than true, then I think we'll refer to this generation as the Gaming Civil War Era, in which two large groups of gamers opposed each other based on largely perceived differences.  Alternately, if the stereotype is largely true, then we will probably refer to this generation as the Schism Era, when gaming split into two distinct branches based on the wants of two largely discrete console audiences.  The outcome of this generation, however, has yet to be written.

So now, a question for the reader.  Considering that this generation is being characterized by a deep division in sides and ideas not seen since the days of the SNES and the Genesis, are there any alternative names this generation might be given?

Battle of the Ideals.

Hmmm this is a nice argument.


I would like to add though that I believe a better name would be to call this right now the Gaming Revolution or Fall of Gaming.

If the Wii continues as it is and creates a whole new culture, then it is a Gaming Revolution.

If the Wii fails and brings in chaos and destruction for the video game industry, then it is the Fall of Gaming.

The Console Renaissance.

And I'll be quite surprised if this era ends as acrimoniously as it began. The upstreaming's already begun, after all.

I'd call it a paradigm shift.

I like console Renaissance.

You say there's going to be conflict and a war between "core" and "casual" gamers... but do the casual gamers even care for there to even be a fight?

IMHO, I think that Nintendo won't try to do another Wii type of console, or if they do, it'll be a mistake. I just can't see, if graphics aren't a selling point to casual gamers, why they'll buy a more hi-tech version of the Wii. Unless they come up with something just as simple to control (I think it's a mistake for MS to compete against the Wii with the Arcade. The biggest problem for casual gamers with PS3/Xbox is the controller) and unique enough to significantly differentiate itself from the Wii, I can't see why casual gamers would want to buy another one.

I believe it will end up as a Schism Era, because it seems to me that the division is real and will only become bigger.

As for the name per se, let's worry not, it shall come on its own.

Good read, btw!

"And I'll be quite surprised if this era ends as acrimoniously as it began."

noname, but if it does end as it began, what are the advantages and disadvantages for ___________ (fill in the blank, it could be Nintendo, the industry as a whole, etc..)?

I really like this thread, kudos to kenny. I'm not sure if u prefer the wii or any specific console for that matter, but u sound inclined to the notion that the wii has earned the top spot which is fine. I believe you have a strong argument.

There's one problem i think that puts a bit of a dent (not saying u support it) to the argument of the Wii as being the top console. The industry is changing, perhaps how the market leader is defined is changing. If this were any other generation, the wii would be hands down the winner. Why, because up until this generation we defined the console victor as the market leader or the console which lead in sales. Or did we? Honestly i dont think we ever did. This generation we seem to be defining the winner as the console with the most respect, or street cred if you will. But i truly believe we always have. If we truly look back, the perceived winner of each generation was always the more respected, it just happened to coincide that the same console was the best selling. Perhaps because the sales of the consoles heavily influenced who we perceived as better and therefore earning our respect. It was the most measurable statistic we had and still have. We said: "x console is the best, yes, yes it is, look! 65 million for x console sold vs. 40 million for y console." And the other party had to swallow their pride. But that was back when we all still wanted the same thing. Back then, there was hardly any mention of the "hardcore" gamer because we were all in a sense, "hardcore". But we are in the middle of a revolution. I think the biggest event to take place was that the industry has grown larger than it's "install base". This has happened abruptly and at a massive scale. The industry has been gradually and healthily growing since it began but suddenly (it began in the sixth gen but truly took off this gen) the gamer population has been outgrown by the industry itself. Before us the gamers made up the gaming world. Now the gaming world sits at the global scale and the people that have always been here are just a part of this world, not the world itself.