WiiU isn't Next Gen?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#101 Posted by Jag85 (4958 posts) -

[QUOTE="LegatoSkyheart"]

Miiverse is the innovation you should care about because it opens the System up more, Social Gaming is starting to become the norm. We should be embracing the Social Connectivity we have with not just our friends but other gamers in the system.

Someone needs help on ZombiU, Let's help them!

Online Fighting Tourny going on right now on Tekken Tag 2? Let's do it!

COD BLOPSII Clan Meet? Gotta go.

The Chat board just has endless possiblities, Imagine having that in not just Nintendo consoles, but on an Xbox system or a Playstation. 

airshocker

Wtf does "social gaming" even mean? The only social aspect I care about is finding people to stomp competitively and I already get that, plus a wider selection of games, with my 360 and PS3.

My point still stands. The WiiU is mediocre, at best, and it's sales reflect that.

The Wii U's first-month sales in 2012 is better than the PS360's first-month sales in 2005/2006. So no, the sales don't reflect anything.

#102 Posted by fernandmondego_ (3170 posts) -

[QUOTE="Heil68"][QUOTE="fernandmondego_"]What makes a console next gen?fernandmondego_
When it is released.

Is there specific date?

Anyone...?

#103 Posted by YearoftheSnake5 (7774 posts) -

Sarcasm? :?

#104 Posted by Nintendo_Ownes7 (30917 posts) -

[QUOTE="fernandmondego_"][QUOTE="Heil68"] When it is released. fernandmondego_

Is there specific date?

Anyone...?

It is also factor in that if that company released a system last generation then their next system will automatically be next gen.

 

When Microsoft released the original Xbox it was in the 6th generation because it was released the same year the GCN released and the GCN was Nintendo's 6th gen system because it was released after the N64.

#105 Posted by fernandmondego_ (3170 posts) -

[QUOTE="fernandmondego_"]

[QUOTE="fernandmondego_"]Is there specific date? Nintendo_Ownes7

Anyone...?

It is also factor in that if that company released a system last generation then their next system will automatically be next gen.

 

When Microsoft released the original Xbox it was in the 6th generation because it was released the same year the GCN released and the GCN was Nintendo's 6th gen system because it was released after the N64.

What if the Xbox had launch a year later or if the Xbox was as powerful as a SNES? Will the 720 and PS4 be 9th gen?  Do Leapfrog consoles count as next gen?

#106 Posted by simomate (1859 posts) -

Graphics Talk is all I hear when people state the WiiU isn't Next Gen.

That's all it matters to you. While you Hype up the Next Halo and the Next Naughty Dog game the only thing that matters to you is Graphics.

The True Next Gen Feature is right here.

Gabe Newell stated that Apple TV is the biggest threat to the Steam Box.

Apple TV streams Music, TV Shows, and Movies on to one's TV and even gives you sports and games. What kind of Games are Apple Devices most known for? Social games.

Nintendo has done this, this is the Next Generation that hopefully will be on the PS4 and Xbox 720.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRSgBwVY8R8v_JuCXZX5jR

That's right, Miiverse, this is the True Next Generation Experience you're going to see in the Next Generation. Graphics aren't nearly as Innovative as this.

Last Generation we kinda had an system like this, but it wasn't nearly as fleshed out as Miiverse is.

Some of the greatest features of the Xbox 360 and PS3 was how easy it was to connect with friends or new people, In fact it's one of the reasons why the Xbox 360 is so popular, and for the PS3, PSHome was 'Home' to many people that liked to fellow gamers and you can explore a grand new world and socialize and play games together.

Next Generation Consoles should surely expand on these things, just like how Nintendo did it.

Miiverse is Available as soon as you turn on the console and is rarely unavailable to you.

Get Stuck on a Game? go to Miiverse, Ask a Question, Post a ScreenShot, and wait, you'll get a response rather quickly.

Right now if you get stuck on a game on the PS3 or 360, you would either

Hope a Friend is on who knows what to do, Stop the Game and go on PSHome and Ask around, or go on Gaming Forums (WiiU also does this bit better, you don't have to stop the game to go online, all you have to do is hit Web Browser and the system would already have Googled the game for you).

Miiverse is doing wonders for Nintendo's 8th Generation system and I hope the other Consoles wise up and do something a lot more similar to it.

LegatoSkyheart
Honestly, I love Miiverse but it doesn't neccessarily require "8th Gen" hardware. Its just an application. In any case, I still think Miiverse is implanted wonderfully. Its one of the best innovations I've seen in recent times.
#107 Posted by clr84651 (5527 posts) -

People come up with bulls*** rules on what makes a next-gen platform.nintendoboy16

It's because the Wii U doesn't pass the 360 or PS3 in specs. Therefore it can't be next gen, because it doesn't exceed what current gen consoles can do. 

#108 Posted by savagetwinkie (7981 posts) -

Like the term JRPG, they have been so misused that people don't understand that they're just literal terms.

Japanese RPG (just its origin, no implied art style or gameplay)

Next generation (of consoles)

Gxgear
no JRPG was made to describe a style of RPGs, there were two differing types of styles from western vs japan and thats why they are classified as such. Have you seen any Jplatformers, or JFPS, or JStrategy? No and its because the different philosophies in gameplay and style differentiated the RPG games so they needed sub genres.
#109 Posted by clr84651 (5527 posts) -

[QUOTE="nintendoboy16"]People come up with bulls*** rules on what makes a next-gen platform.clr84651

It's because the Wii U doesn't pass the 360 or PS3 in specs. Therefore it can't be next gen, because it doesn't exceed what current gen consoles can do. 

To be the next generation ahead it has to go beyond what the curent ones can do. And a gimmicky control pad doesn't count. We're talking CPU power,GPU Power, and a faster discdrive that uses higher capacity discs. 

#110 Posted by outworld222 (2467 posts) -

Next gen is not synonumous with "Advanced Graphics"

 

But I sure hate their second screen controller though :/

#111 Posted by super600 (30865 posts) -

[QUOTE="nintendoboy16"]People come up with bulls*** rules on what makes a next-gen platform.clr84651

It's because the Wii U doesn't pass the 360 or PS3 in specs. Therefore it can't be next gen, because it doesn't exceed what current gen consoles can do. 

It's 2X more powerful then those console.X shows that. Tell me one open world game that looks as good as that game on the 360 and PS3.

#112 Posted by Jag85 (4958 posts) -

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

Like the term JRPG, they have been so misused that people don't understand that they're just literal terms.

Japanese RPG (just its origin, no implied art style or gameplay)

Next generation (of consoles)

savagetwinkie

no JRPG was made to describe a style of RPGs, there were two differing types of styles from western vs japan and thats why they are classified as such. Have you seen any Jplatformers, or JFPS, or JStrategy? No and its because the different philosophies in gameplay and style differentiated the RPG games so they needed sub genres.

The problem with the labels JRPG and WRPG is that they tell us hardly anything about the actual gameplay, but they're just used to describe what kind of art style, story or characters a game has, i.e. anime-style or Hollywood-style.

#113 Posted by Jag85 (4958 posts) -

[QUOTE="clr84651"]

[QUOTE="nintendoboy16"]People come up with bulls*** rules on what makes a next-gen platform.clr84651

It's because the Wii U doesn't pass the 360 or PS3 in specs. Therefore it can't be next gen, because it doesn't exceed what current gen consoles can do. 

To be the next generation ahead it has to go beyond what the curent ones can do. And a gimmicky control pad doesn't count. We're talking CPU power,GPU Power, and a faster discdrive that uses higher capacity discs. 

Power isn't the only thing that defines next gen. Back in the 80s, the NES wasn't anymore powerful than the Atari 5200, yet the Atari 5200 is regarded as 2nd-gen while the NES is regarded as 3rd-gen. Console generations are simply referring to the time periods, not the power levels.

And for the record, the Wii U does have a more powerful GPU, more powerful than the PS360 combined. That's not even up for debate, but what is up for debate is the CPU, which appears to have a lower clock rate than the PS360 CPU's. But if you think about it, it's not such a big deal, since the GPGPU can offload work from the CPU, while at the same time the DSP audio processor and OS CPU also offload work from the main CPU. These, especially the much more powerful GPGPU, more than make up for the CPU's lower clock rate (thus keeping the temperature down).

And as has already been pointed out, a game like "X" cannot be replicated on the PS360. While its graphical quality can be rivalled on a smaller scale, there is no way the PS360 can maintain that quality across such a huge open world, with such long draw distances, at 1080p and 60 fps no less. The Wii U is more powerful than the PS360, but only if developers utilize it properly by focusing more on the GPGPU and less on the CPU, which I'm sure is what Monolith Soft must have done for "X".

#114 Posted by Riverwolf007 (24018 posts) -

dude... i just got something out of my backpack to kill zombies with... with my penis.

how the hell is that not next gen?

#115 Posted by KarateeeChop (4666 posts) -

dude... i just got something out of my backpack to kill zombies with... with my penis.

how the hell is that not next gen?

Riverwolf007

grandmaster of lulz, where have you been? :cry:

#116 Posted by Primordialous (1276 posts) -

Inb4 ridiculous graphics debates and some dumbass saying "herp derp if N64 was launched today blahblahblah" Oh, and because he deserves a special shoutout, inb4 Shadowmoses.darkspineslayer

#117 Posted by airshocker (30652 posts) -

The Wii U's first-month sales in 2012 is better than the PS360's first-month sales in 2005/2006. So no, the sales don't reflect anything.

Jag85

Of course the sales reflect something. That's nonsense. They're currently selling the console at a loss in order to move it off the shelves. That's a big danger sign to me. I don't remember the 360 or PS3 selling at a loss so quickly in order to move product.

#118 Posted by glez13 (8924 posts) -

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

Like the term JRPG, they have been so misused that people don't understand that they're just literal terms.

Japanese RPG (just its origin, no implied art style or gameplay)

Next generation (of consoles)

savagetwinkie

no JRPG was made to describe a style of RPGs, there were two differing types of styles from western vs japan and thats why they are classified as such. Have you seen any Jplatformers, or JFPS, or JStrategy? No and its because the different philosophies in gameplay and style differentiated the RPG games so they needed sub genres.

This. JRPG was simply the way to call Light RPG's outside Japan, mostly because almost only them did this "subgenre" of RPG's. It was also called console RPG since they mostly only developed for consoles. Actually the term JRPG came later and it's a short form for Japanese styled role-playing game. If you look for reviews or other gaming related articles in magazines or online including here  on GS from the mid-late 90's you will see how Japanese styled role-playing game was used and little by little got replaced by JRPG.

#119 Posted by Riverwolf007 (24018 posts) -

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

dude... i just got something out of my backpack to kill zombies with... with my penis.

how the hell is that not next gen?

KarateeeChop

grandmaster of lulz, where have you been? :cry:

over at electronic book wars.... argh they make me so crazy! frikkin nook users! thinkin they all cool and shyt. 

#120 Posted by Riverwolf007 (24018 posts) -

[QUOTE="Jag85"]

The Wii U's first-month sales in 2012 is better than the PS360's first-month sales in 2005/2006. So no, the sales don't reflect anything.

airshocker

Of course the sales reflect something. That's nonsense. They're currently selling the console at a loss in order to move it off the shelves. That's a big danger sign to me. I don't remember the 360 or PS3 selling at a loss so quickly in order to move product.

funny you say that because i do remember  exactly that.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/fun.games/07/09/sony.price.reut/index.html

"SAN FRANCISCO, California (Reuters) -- Sony has cut the price of the PlayStation 3 by $100, or 17 percent, in the United States, a move that should boost the video game console's lackluster sales."

#121 Posted by StaticOnTV (583 posts) -

[QUOTE="clr84651"]

[QUOTE="clr84651"]

It's because the Wii U doesn't pass the 360 or PS3 in specs. Therefore it can't be next gen, because it doesn't exceed what current gen consoles can do. 

Jag85

To be the next generation ahead it has to go beyond what the curent ones can do. And a gimmicky control pad doesn't count. We're talking CPU power,GPU Power, and a faster discdrive that uses higher capacity discs. 

Power isn't the only thing that defines next gen. Back in the 80s, the NES wasn't anymore powerful than the Atari 5200, yet the Atari 5200 is regarded as 2nd-gen while the NES is regarded as 3rd-gen. Console generations are simply referring to the time periods, not the power levels.

And for the record, the Wii U does have a more powerful GPU, more powerful than the PS360 combined. That's not even up for debate, but what is up for debate is the CPU, which appears to have a lower clock rate than the PS360 CPU's. But if you think about it, it's not such a big deal, since the GPGPU can offload work from the CPU, while at the same time the DSP audio processor and OS CPU also offload work from the main CPU. These, especially the much more powerful GPGPU, more than make up for the CPU's lower clock rate (thus keeping the temperature down).

And as has already been pointed out, a game like "X" cannot be replicated on the PS360. While its graphical quality can be rivalled on a smaller scale, there is no way the PS360 can maintain that quality across such a huge open world, with such long draw distances, at 1080p and 60 fps no less. The Wii U is more powerful than the PS360, but only if developers utilize it properly by focusing more on the GPGPU and less on the CPU, which I'm sure is what Monolith Soft must have done for "X".

If you said 7800 you would have had an argument.
#122 Posted by Jag85 (4958 posts) -

[QUOTE="Jag85"]

The Wii U's first-month sales in 2012 is better than the PS360's first-month sales in 2005/2006. So no, the sales don't reflect anything.

airshocker

Of course the sales reflect something. That's nonsense. They're currently selling the console at a loss in order to move it off the shelves. That's a big danger sign to me. I don't remember the 360 or PS3 selling at a loss so quickly in order to move product.


You serious? Microsoft sold both Xbox consoles at a loss, while Sony sold the PS3 at an even bigger loss. It's a common strategy for console manufacturers to sell the console at a loss and make profit on the software, a strategy that's been employed ever since the Sega Mega Drive / Genesis in the 16-bit era.

On the other hand, Nintendo was always making a profit on every console they sold, ever since the NES all the way up until the Wii. The Wii U is the first time Nintendo has ever sold a home console at a loss, while the 3DS is the first time they sold a handheld at a loss. It's unusual by Nintendo standards, but it's actually quite common by Sega/Microsoft/Sony standards. What should be more surprising is why it took Nintendo so long to adopt this strategy.

This. JRPG was simply the way to call Light RPG's outside Japan, mostly because almost only them did this "subgenre" of RPG's. It was also called console RPG since they mostly only developed for consoles. Actually the term JRPG came later and it's a short form for Japanese styled role-playing game. If you look for reviews or other gaming related articles in magazines or online including here  on GS from the mid-late 90's you will see how Japanese styled role-playing game was used and little by little got replaced by JRPG.

glez13


The term "console RPG" was the most common term back then, up until what was known as the "computer RPG" started coming to consoles in the early 2000s. They then became "Japanese style" and "American style", before eventually becoming "JRPG" and "WRPG". The problem though, is that the terms have always been poorly defined, with the cliches and stereotypes associated with these labels never being consistent and always changing with the times, sometimes even switching places.

For example, in the 90s, Japanese RPGs were seen as being more fast-paced and action-oriented while American RPGs were seen as slower-paced and turn-based, yet a decade later the roles reversed. Likewise, neither Japanese RPGs nor American RPGs were seen as being more or less linear than the other in the 90s, yet that's how many defined the "JRPG" and "WRPG" labels a decade later. And nowadays, the perceptions are changing once again, with gamers associating "JRPG" with games like Xenoblade rather than Final Fantasy. The only perceptions that seem to have any consistency are probably the art styles and/or character designs.

#123 Posted by Jag85 (4958 posts) -

[QUOTE="Jag85"]

[QUOTE="clr84651"]

To be the next generation ahead it has to go beyond what the curent ones can do. And a gimmicky control pad doesn't count. We're talking CPU power,GPU Power, and a faster discdrive that uses higher capacity discs. 

StaticOnTV

Power isn't the only thing that defines next gen. Back in the 80s, the NES wasn't anymore powerful than the Atari 5200, yet the Atari 5200 is regarded as 2nd-gen while the NES is regarded as 3rd-gen. Console generations are simply referring to the time periods, not the power levels.

And for the record, the Wii U does have a more powerful GPU, more powerful than the PS360 combined. That's not even up for debate, but what is up for debate is the CPU, which appears to have a lower clock rate than the PS360 CPU's. But if you think about it, it's not such a big deal, since the GPGPU can offload work from the CPU, while at the same time the DSP audio processor and OS CPU also offload work from the main CPU. These, especially the much more powerful GPGPU, more than make up for the CPU's lower clock rate (thus keeping the temperature down).

And as has already been pointed out, a game like "X" cannot be replicated on the PS360. While its graphical quality can be rivalled on a smaller scale, there is no way the PS360 can maintain that quality across such a huge open world, with such long draw distances, at 1080p and 60 fps no less. The Wii U is more powerful than the PS360, but only if developers utilize it properly by focusing more on the GPGPU and less on the CPU, which I'm sure is what Monolith Soft must have done for "X".

If you said 7800 you would have had an argument.

No, your eyes are not deceiving you... the Atari 5200 is exactly what I meant. If you do a spec-by-spec comparison, the NES doesn't appear to have any real technical advantage over the 5200, the most powerful console of the 2nd generation. They both had MOS 6502-based CPU's clocked at 1.79 MHz, while the 5200 even had more RAM, a slightly higher resolution, and could display more simultaneous colours. The only real advantage the NES appears to have had was superior audio from its dedicated sound chip. The reason why we remember the NES being more powerful is because it was pushed to its limits many years later, whereas the 5200 died a premature death due to the 1983/1984 game industry crash.

As for the Atari 7800, that was also barely an improvement at all over its 5200 predecessor, technically speaking. The specs for the 5200 and 7800 were almost identical, except the 7800 had better audio but less RAM.

The only console in the 3rd gen that was truly next gen in terms of specs was the Sega Master System, whereas both the NES and Atari 7800 were barely an improvement at all over the previous generation, technically speaking.

#124 Posted by StaticOnTV (583 posts) -

[QUOTE="StaticOnTV"][QUOTE="Jag85"] Power isn't the only thing that defines next gen. Back in the 80s, the NES wasn't anymore powerful than the Atari 5200, yet the Atari 5200 is regarded as 2nd-gen while the NES is regarded as 3rd-gen. Console generations are simply referring to the time periods, not the power levels.

And for the record, the Wii U does have a more powerful GPU, more powerful than the PS360 combined. That's not even up for debate, but what is up for debate is the CPU, which appears to have a lower clock rate than the PS360 CPU's. But if you think about it, it's not such a big deal, since the GPGPU can offload work from the CPU, while at the same time the DSP audio processor and OS CPU also offload work from the main CPU. These, especially the much more powerful GPGPU, more than make up for the CPU's lower clock rate (thus keeping the temperature down).

And as has already been pointed out, a game like "X" cannot be replicated on the PS360. While its graphical quality can be rivalled on a smaller scale, there is no way the PS360 can maintain that quality across such a huge open world, with such long draw distances, at 1080p and 60 fps no less. The Wii U is more powerful than the PS360, but only if developers utilize it properly by focusing more on the GPGPU and less on the CPU, which I'm sure is what Monolith Soft must have done for "X".

Jag85

If you said 7800 you would have had an argument.

No, your eyes are not deceiving you... the Atari 5200 is exactly what I meant. If you do a spec-by-spec comparison, the NES doesn't appear to have any real technical advantage over the 5200, the most powerful console of the 2nd generation. They both had MOS 6502-based CPU's clocked at 1.79 MHz, while the 5200 even had more RAM, a slightly higher resolution, and could display more simultaneous colours. The only real advantage the NES appears to have had was the superior audio chip. The reason why we remember the NES being more powerful is because it was pushed to its limits many years later, whereas the 5200 died a premature death due to the 1983/1984 game industry crash.

Yeah, but the 7800 was even more ahead, the 5200 was only slightly arguably more powerful. @nd gen is also very confusing as there was four different power generations in that "gen".
#125 Posted by FastEddie2121 (3081 posts) -
Getting some good Atari tech talk here! +10 internets
#126 Posted by StaticOnTV (583 posts) -

[QUOTE="airshocker"]

[QUOTE="Jag85"]

Of course the sales reflect something. That's nonsense. They're currently selling the console at a loss in order to move it off the shelves. That's a big danger sign to me. I don't remember the 360 or PS3 selling at a loss so quickly in order to move product.

Jag85


You serious? Microsoft sold both Xbox consoles at a loss, while Sony sold the PS3 at an even bigger loss. It's a common strategy for console manufacturers to sell the console at a loss and make profit on the software, a strategy that's been employed ever since the Sega Mega Drive / Genesis in the 16-bit era.

On the other hand, Nintendo was always making a profit on every console they sold, ever since the NES all the way up until the Wii. The Wii U is the first time Nintendo has ever sold a home console at a loss, while the 3DS is the first time they sold a handheld at a loss. It's unusual by Nintendo standards, but it's actually quite common by Sega/Microsoft/Sony standards. What should be more surprising is why it took Nintendo so long to adopt this strategy.

This. JRPG was simply the way to call Light RPG's outside Japan, mostly because almost only them did this "subgenre" of RPG's. It was also called console RPG since they mostly only developed for consoles. Actually the term JRPG came later and it's a short form for Japanese styled role-playing game. If you look for reviews or other gaming related articles in magazines or online including here  on GS from the mid-late 90's you will see how Japanese styled role-playing game was used and little by little got replaced by JRPG.

glez13


The term "console RPG" was the most common term back then, up until what was known as the "computer RPG" started coming to consoles in the early 2000s. They then became "Japanese style" and "American style", before eventually becoming "JRPG" and "WRPG". The problem though, is that the terms have always been poorly defined, with the cliches and stereotypes associated with these labels never being consistent and always changing with the times, sometimes even switching places.

For example, in the 90s, Japanese RPGs were seen as being more fast-paced and action-oriented while American RPGs were seen as slower-paced and turn-based, yet a decade later the roles reversed. Likewise, neither Japanese RPGs nor American RPGs were seen as being more or less linear than the other in the 90s, yet that's how many defined the "JRPG" and "WRPG" labels a decade later. And nowadays, the perceptions are changing once again, with gamers associating "JRPG" with games like Xenoblade rather than Final Fantasy. The only perceptions that seem to have any consistency are probably the art styles and/or character designs.

Not really, Jrpgs turn-based and American-rpg turn based were handled differently. Especially when Jrpgs relied much mre heavily on RB, which is one of the main differences. As for the terms, they are inconsistent yes, however there are a couple things that contine to stand out.
#127 Posted by Gxgear (10425 posts) -

[QUOTE="Gxgear"]

Like the term JRPG, they have been so misused that people don't understand that they're just literal terms.

Japanese RPG (just its origin, no implied art style or gameplay)

Next generation (of consoles)

savagetwinkie

no JRPG was made to describe a style of RPGs, there were two differing types of styles from western vs japan and thats why they are classified as such. Have you seen any Jplatformers, or JFPS, or JStrategy? No and its because the different philosophies in gameplay and style differentiated the RPG games so they needed sub genres.

Dear lord.

#128 Posted by Jag85 (4958 posts) -

[QUOTE="Jag85"]

[QUOTE="StaticOnTV"] If you said 7800 you would have had an argument.StaticOnTV

No, your eyes are not deceiving you... the Atari 5200 is exactly what I meant. If you do a spec-by-spec comparison, the NES doesn't appear to have any real technical advantage over the 5200, the most powerful console of the 2nd generation. They both had MOS 6502-based CPU's clocked at 1.79 MHz, while the 5200 even had more RAM, a slightly higher resolution, and could display more simultaneous colours. The only real advantage the NES appears to have had was the superior audio chip. The reason why we remember the NES being more powerful is because it was pushed to its limits many years later, whereas the 5200 died a premature death due to the 1983/1984 game industry crash.

Yeah, but the 7800 was even more ahead, the 5200 was only slightly arguably more powerful.

@nd gen is also very confusing as there was four different power generations in that "gen".

I've just edited my post, and added the following:

"As for the Atari 7800, that was also barely an improvement at all over its 5200 predecessor, technically speaking. The specs for the 5200 and 7800 were almost identical, except the 7800 had better audio but less RAM.

The only console in the 3rd gen that was truly next gen in terms of specs was the Sega Master System, whereas both the NES and Atari 7800 were barely an improvement at all over the previous generation, technically speaking."

EDIT:

By the way, I think it was more like two power generations within the 2nd gen, the first being the late 70s consoles (Fairchild Channel F, Atari 2600, Bally Astrocade, Intellivision) and the second being the early 80s consoles (ColecoVision and Atari 5200). That second group of consoles had specs that rivalled at least three of the 3rd gen consoles: the NES, Sega SG-1000 (released same day as NES), and Atari 7800. The only 3rd gen console that was truly far ahead of the previous gen was the Sega Master System, which was intended as a "next gen" Sega SG-1000 (hence why the SMS was called Sega Mark III in Japan), making it even more confusing, as if there were two power generations within the 3rd gen as well.

#129 Posted by Mario1331 (8828 posts) -

are people arguing if wiiu is nex gen when generation is just a time frame?

#130 Posted by Jag85 (4958 posts) -

Not really, Jrpgs turn-based and American-rpg turn based were handled differently. Especially when Jrpgs relied much mre heavily on RB, which is one of the main differences. As for the terms, they are inconsistent yes, however there are a couple things that contine to stand out.

StaticOnTV

"RB"? Surely you mean ATB?

#131 Posted by StaticOnTV (583 posts) -

[QUOTE="StaticOnTV"]

Not really, Jrpgs turn-based and American-rpg turn based were handled differently. Especially when Jrpgs relied much mre heavily on RB, which is one of the main differences. As for the terms, they are inconsistent yes, however there are a couple things that contine to stand out.

Jag85

"RB"? Surely you mean ATB?

Random Battles. Although ATB is another thing
#132 Posted by Jag85 (4958 posts) -

[QUOTE="Jag85"]

[QUOTE="StaticOnTV"]

Not really, Jrpgs turn-based and American-rpg turn based were handled differently. Especially when Jrpgs relied much mre heavily on RB, which is one of the main differences. As for the terms, they are inconsistent yes, however there are a couple things that contine to stand out.

StaticOnTV

"RB"? Surely you mean ATB?

Random Battles. Although ATB is another thing

Oh, that. If you go back even further though, random battles were also common in early American RPGs such as Wizardry and Ultima. American RPG's didn't start abandoning random encounters until the 90s. Up until then, random encounters were never a point of differentiation. Like I said, the definitions and meanings of those labels have changed quite a lot over the years.

#133 Posted by StaticOnTV (583 posts) -

[QUOTE="StaticOnTV"][QUOTE="Jag85"] No, your eyes are not deceiving you... the Atari 5200 is exactly what I meant. If you do a spec-by-spec comparison, the NES doesn't appear to have any real technical advantage over the 5200, the most powerful console of the 2nd generation. They both had MOS 6502-based CPU's clocked at 1.79 MHz, while the 5200 even had more RAM, a slightly higher resolution, and could display more simultaneous colours. The only real advantage the NES appears to have had was the superior audio chip. The reason why we remember the NES being more powerful is because it was pushed to its limits many years later, whereas the 5200 died a premature death due to the 1983/1984 game industry crash.

Jag85

Yeah, but the 7800 was even more ahead, the 5200 was only slightly arguably more powerful.

@nd gen is also very confusing as there was four different power generations in that "gen".

I've just edited my post, and added the following:

"As for the Atari 7800, that was also barely an improvement at all over its 5200 predecessor, technically speaking. The specs for the 5200 and 7800 were almost identical, except the 7800 had better audio but less RAM.

The only console in the 3rd gen that was truly next gen in terms of specs was the Sega Master System, whereas both the NES and Atari 7800 were barely an improvement at all over the previous generation, technically speaking."

EDIT:

By the way, I think it was more like two power generations within the 2nd gen, the first being the late 70s consoles (Fairchild Channel F, Atari 2600, Bally Astrocade, Intellivision) and the second being the early 80s consoles (ColecoVision and Atari 5200). That second group of consoles had specs that rivalled at least three of the 3rd gen consoles: the NES, Sega SG-1000 (released same day as NES), and Atari 7800. The only 3rd gen console that was truly far ahead of the previous gen was the Sega Master System, which was intended as a "next gen" Sega SG-1000 (hence why the SMS was called Sega Mark III in Japan), making it even more confusing, as if there were two power generations within the 3rd gen as well.

The 7800 could handle a lot more sprites on screen than both the 5200 and the NES as well as if I am not mistaken able to output a higher resolution with its custom chip. Also I believe there were more than 2 power levels second gen. You had 2600/Rca Studio etc. the ODyssey2/Vectrex etc, Coleco/Intellivision etc and 5200/Sg-1000. I do agree that the NES and 7800 were not truly ahead, Sega mAster System along with Amstrad and XEGS held that title third gen.
#134 Posted by StaticOnTV (583 posts) -

[QUOTE="StaticOnTV"][QUOTE="Jag85"]

"RB"? Surely you mean ATB?

Jag85

Random Battles. Although ATB is another thing

Oh, that. If you go back even further though, random battles were also common in early American RPGs such as Wizardry and Ultima. American RPG's didn't start abandoning random encounters until the 90s. Up until then, random encounters were never a point of differentiation. Like I said, the definitions and meanings of those labels have changed quite a lot over the years.

No, the random battle were ot used the same. In Japan radom battles almost always 99% of the time required to transition to a different screen and reload your place once finished, a thing not an issue with ultima. There were quite a few rpgs before the 90's that had no random battle at all, and I have yet to see more than a couple handle it like Jrpgs do. Same goes with the false illusion of exploration.
#135 Posted by BranKetra (49248 posts) -
Nintendo is doing good and the company is making its own path. Rather than make a console with a focus on graphics, they incorporate a screen into the controller. Instead of focusing on what players play, they care more about the way games play. It is an innovative company.
#136 Posted by BrunoBRS (73263 posts) -
for a moment i feared you had gone mad and posted the billionth topic on that new monolith game.
#137 Posted by GD1551 (9155 posts) -

People come up with bulls*** rules on what makes a next-gen platform.nintendoboy16

Indeed and it goes both ways.

#138 Posted by Jag85 (4958 posts) -

[QUOTE="Jag85"]

[QUOTE="StaticOnTV"] Yeah, but the 7800 was even more ahead, the 5200 was only slightly arguably more powerful.

@nd gen is also very confusing as there was four different power generations in that "gen".StaticOnTV

I've just edited my post, and added the following:

"As for the Atari 7800, that was also barely an improvement at all over its 5200 predecessor, technically speaking. The specs for the 5200 and 7800 were almost identical, except the 7800 had better audio but less RAM.

The only console in the 3rd gen that was truly next gen in terms of specs was the Sega Master System, whereas both the NES and Atari 7800 were barely an improvement at all over the previous generation, technically speaking."

EDIT:

By the way, I think it was more like two power generations within the 2nd gen, the first being the late 70s consoles (Fairchild Channel F, Atari 2600, Bally Astrocade, Intellivision) and the second being the early 80s consoles (ColecoVision and Atari 5200). That second group of consoles had specs that rivalled at least three of the 3rd gen consoles: the NES, Sega SG-1000 (released same day as NES), and Atari 7800. The only 3rd gen console that was truly far ahead of the previous gen was the Sega Master System, which was intended as a "next gen" Sega SG-1000 (hence why the SMS was called Sega Mark III in Japan), making it even more confusing, as if there were two power generations within the 3rd gen as well.

The 7800 could handle a lot more sprites on screen than both the 5200 and the NES as well as if I am not mistaken able to output a higher resolution with its custom chip.

Also I believe there were more than 2 power levels second gen. You had 2600/Rca Studio etc. the ODyssey2/Vectrex etc, Coleco/Intellivision etc and 5200/Sg-1000.

I do agree that the NES and 7800 were not truly ahead, Sega mAster System along with Amstrad and XEGS held that title third gen.

True about the sprites, but the 7800's resolution was only slightly higher than the 5200, though the 7800's RAM was significantly less, even less than the NES.

I wasn't referring to power levels (which goes for almost any generation), but 'power generations'. The power difference between the late 70s consoles (2600, Fairchild, etc.) and the early 80s consoles (ColecoVision and 5200) was almost a generation apart, yet both are classified 2nd gen, probably because those later consoles didn't really live long enough to show off their potential like the NES did.

By the way, not sure I would really consider the Amstrad GX4000 as a true third-gen console. While it was an 8-bit console, it came long after the 16-bit era began.

#139 Posted by timmy00 (15360 posts) -

The Wii-U is next gen. Along the line of the PS4 and Xboxwhatever. Anyone who says otherwise is wrong. Plain and simple.

/stating what already been said

#140 Posted by Jag85 (4958 posts) -

[QUOTE="Jag85"]

[QUOTE="StaticOnTV"] Random Battles. Although ATB is another thingStaticOnTV

Oh, that. If you go back even further though, random battles were also common in early American RPGs such as Wizardry and Ultima. American RPG's didn't start abandoning random encounters until the 90s. Up until then, random encounters were never a point of differentiation. Like I said, the definitions and meanings of those labels have changed quite a lot over the years.

No, the random battle were ot used the same. In Japan radom battles almost always 99% of the time required to transition to a different screen and reload your place once finished, a thing not an issue with ultima. There were quite a few rpgs before the 90's that had no random battle at all, and I have yet to see more than a couple handle it like Jrpgs do. Same goes with the false illusion of exploration.

Actually, the early Ultima games did have the screen transitions. The later Ultima games in the 90s eventually abandoned the screen transitions, but the early Ultima games did have those screen transitions we associate with JRPG random encounters.

Like I said, the random encounters weren't considered a point of differentiation in the early 90s, and neither were the screen transitions. These were things American RPGs had also been doing for years but slowly began abandoning at the time.

Some of the bigger points of differentiation in the early 90s were things like the greater emphasis on storytelling and predefined characterization in games like Phantasy Star II and FFIV, or the Active Time Battle system in FFIV, or the action-oriented combat in games like Zelda (which was labelled a console RPG back then) and Secret of Mana. These were the kind of elements often associated with Japanese console RPG's in the early 90s.

#141 Posted by airshocker (30652 posts) -

funny you say that because i do remember  exactly that.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/fun.games/07/09/sony.price.reut/index.html

"SAN FRANCISCO, California (Reuters) -- Sony has cut the price of the PlayStation 3 by $100, or 17 percent, in the United States, a move that should boost the video game console's lackluster sales."

Riverwolf007

It's also funny that you didn't seem to read what I was actually writing.

#142 Posted by airshocker (30652 posts) -

You serious? Microsoft sold both Xbox consoles at a loss, while Sony sold the PS3 at an even bigger loss. It's a common strategy for console manufacturers to sell the console at a loss and make profit on the software, a strategy that's been employed ever since the Sega Mega Drive / Genesis in the 16-bit era.

On the other hand, Nintendo was always making a profit on every console they sold, ever since the NES all the way up until the Wii. The Wii U is the first time Nintendo has ever sold a home console at a loss, while the 3DS is the first time they sold a handheld at a loss. It's unusual by Nintendo standards, but it's actually quite common by Sega/Microsoft/Sony standards. What should be more surprising is why it took Nintendo so long to adopt this strategy.

Jag85

What is it with you people and your reading comprehension skills?

I never said they didn't eventually sell them at a loss.

#143 Posted by Jag85 (4958 posts) -

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

funny you say that because i do remember  exactly that.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/fun.games/07/09/sony.price.reut/index.html

"SAN FRANCISCO, California (Reuters) -- Sony has cut the price of the PlayStation 3 by $100, or 17 percent, in the United States, a move that should boost the video game console's lackluster sales."

airshocker

It's also funny that you didn't seem to read what I was actually writing.

Wait... That was supposed to be sarcasm? If so, then my sarcasm indicator must have failed me...
#144 Posted by airshocker (30652 posts) -

Wait... That was supposed to be sarcasm? If so, then my sarcasm indicator must have failed me...Jag85

You're in no position to talk. Both of you failed to grasp the meaning of what I wrote.

#145 Posted by Jag85 (4958 posts) -

[QUOTE="Jag85"]

You serious? Microsoft sold both Xbox consoles at a loss, while Sony sold the PS3 at an even bigger loss. It's a common strategy for console manufacturers to sell the console at a loss and make profit on the software, a strategy that's been employed ever since the Sega Mega Drive / Genesis in the 16-bit era.

On the other hand, Nintendo was always making a profit on every console they sold, ever since the NES all the way up until the Wii. The Wii U is the first time Nintendo has ever sold a home console at a loss, while the 3DS is the first time they sold a handheld at a loss. It's unusual by Nintendo standards, but it's actually quite common by Sega/Microsoft/Sony standards. What should be more surprising is why it took Nintendo so long to adopt this strategy.

airshocker

What is it with you people and your reading comprehension skills?

I never said they didn't eventually sell them at a loss.


Okay, looks like it wasn't sarcasm after all...

In that case, both the 360 and PS3 were selling at a loss since day one... So I have no idea what you're trying to get at here,

#146 Posted by Gue1 (10719 posts) -

[QUOTE="savagetwinkie"][QUOTE="Gxgear"]

Like the term JRPG, they have been so misused that people don't understand that they're just literal terms.

Japanese RPG (just its origin, no implied art style or gameplay)

Next generation (of consoles)

Gxgear

no JRPG was made to describe a style of RPGs, there were two differing types of styles from western vs japan and thats why they are classified as such. Have you seen any Jplatformers, or JFPS, or JStrategy? No and its because the different philosophies in gameplay and style differentiated the RPG games so they needed sub genres.

Dear lord.

 

dude it's true, you're the one that doesn't want to understand anything. The term was invented because some people were pissed at the fact that  those anime quirky looking games were being mixed together in the same genre with games like Planetscape. But back in the Snes days every game in the genre was just called an "RPG" but then FF7 came in with the big swords, spiky hair and anime infused story-lines to make them really popular and the elitists/anime haters started calling those games JRPGs.

 

JRPGs is not just because it comes fom Japan it's because most of those kind of anime quirky games came from there so the most appropiate term to use to describe them was by using its nationality. Japanese Role Playing Games. I mean, how old are you that you don't understand this? Like 16?

#148 Posted by Riverwolf007 (24018 posts) -

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

funny you say that because i do remember  exactly that.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/fun.games/07/09/sony.price.reut/index.html

"SAN FRANCISCO, California (Reuters) -- Sony has cut the price of the PlayStation 3 by $100, or 17 percent, in the United States, a move that should boost the video game console's lackluster sales."

airshocker

It's also funny that you didn't seem to read what I was actually writing.

i thought you were commenting on what bad news it is for a console to be  holding  emergency firesales early in its lifespan and just thought that i could show you an example in which it may not be such a  gloomy forecast  of the future.

i don't care one bit about the wiiu or how it does or whatever just that your point seemed to be the wiiu is in terrible trouble when we have an example in that link where the ps3 was on lifesupport 6 or 7 months into its lifespan but things turned out passable in the end.

#149 Posted by airshocker (30652 posts) -

i thought you were commenting on what bad news it is for a console to be  holding  emergency firesales early in its lifespan and just thought that i could show you an example in which it may not be such a  gloomy forecast  of the future.

i don't care one bit about the wiiu or how it does or whatever just that your point seemed to be the wiiu is in terrible trouble when we have an example in that link where the ps3 was on lifesupport 6 or 7 months into its lifespan but things turned out passable in the end.

Riverwolf007

We're not even in the same ballpark as with what happened with the PS3. The PS3 can compete. The WiiU? I'm not seeing it.

#150 Posted by Riverwolf007 (24018 posts) -

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

i thought you were commenting on what bad news it is for a console to be  holding  emergency firesales early in its lifespan and just thought that i could show you an example in which it may not be such a  gloomy forecast  of the future.

i don't care one bit about the wiiu or how it does or whatever just that your point seemed to be the wiiu is in terrible trouble when we have an example in that link where the ps3 was on lifesupport 6 or 7 months into its lifespan but things turned out passable in the end.

airshocker

We're not even in the same ballpark as with what happened with the PS3. The PS3 can compete. The WiiU? I'm not seeing it.

lulz, yeah it looks shytty and all but i think the wiiu prolly has a better position than the ps3 ever had.

the wiiu has a built in customer base of parents and grandparents  that have money to blow on silly crap.

if you are in the 45 to 90 age range and need to buy a kid something what are you going to get?

something safe, something that plays mario and all the rest of those tired old household name franchises that they know for a fact is not filled with blood and boobs.

far be it from me to be shilling for some crappy console that i don't like but reality is reality here.