Do you consider Wii a next gen console?

[Dregun]

Its funny that more people as of right now have voted "No" but hardly anyone has support the reason for that vote.

A curious question would be would you consider the Wii a next gen console if the only thing different was the Wii controller itself? Most people are playing the "next console from manufacturer" card, but would you consider a PS2+Eye Toy bundle next gen as well?

By only looking at past generations of "EVERY" console that has been released as "next generation" the Wii does not fit that category...sorry. I based my vote on what has taken place in the past and the Wii didn't follow the same path of even their previous consoles.

This isn't to say the Wii is a bad console but I dont think it can be called next generation.


Dregun

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Next gen = the next generation of some thing. The next generation doesn't have to be better to follow the previous generation.

Obviously these days 'Next Gen' has become a term like TrueHD; something with meaning though without definition. It's associated with lots more power than the previous set of consoles. This is an interesting poll to see how people respond to language,. but I think it'd be better on an English forum than a console forum! Don't see what it contributes to sensible discussion about consoles, and is likely to only get people's backs up when their definition isn't adopted by others.

 

[Rolf N]

Games count as multimedia right? so yes. Your phone can be a multimedia device too, it might not be great at it, but it still is.

And yet, multimedia is a meaningless buzz-phrase that lacks any clear canonical definition and will bend to any salesman's will. I don't give a fuck if something is multi-media or not. If today a salesman stood before me trying to pitch me a device with its multi-media capabilities, I'd similarly feel tempted to just punch h...something. Because after ten years of useless buzz-phrasing it would be obvious that walking away has not worked so far, and different didactic techniques are required.
But that will not happen. Marketers don't use that word to pitch products anymore because it has run its course, people have understood it means nothing, become numb to it in the best case, and cynically bitchy as myself in worse cases, and as there was never a point to it, it can safely be omitted from conversations now.

It's the exact same thing with "next gen", with the sole difference that consumer (self-)education on that term is lagging a few years behind "multi-media".

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

OTOH because the Wii follows a differant path than the other consoles released does that mean its less nex gen because of that?

As far as the ps2+eyetoy bundle goes, if sony sold that as the ps3 I guess you could consider it the next generation product of sony. Though you do strike a very interesting point I think because if sony would sell it as the ps3 I dont think I would feel like its the ps3 as its basically a ps2 with eyetoy. So the exact same hardware you could already get with the ps2. OTOH I do feel the Wii is next gen because its not a GC even though it might not be all that different in design.

edit: This as a reply to Dregun

 

[LogisticX]

I feel that the Wii isn't the a next gen console for th reasons that have already been described by Dregun. It isn't next gen in the sense that we have come to know next gen.

Next generation implies something more in-tune with the way that games are going to evolve. With the jump from SNES to N64 for example, was the transition from 2d to 3d gaming, at least the feasible capability of it.

With the PS2, Xbox and GC, there were promises of movie-like experiences, where fully detailed models could be mistaken for something seen in the theaters. With the Xbox360 and PS3, this achievement becomes ever more real, but for the Wii, it seems to be stuck in the last gen presentation to gaming. Not only that, but regardless of what one might think, the extra horsepower does contribute to greater level of depth to gaming in terms of AI and just being able to render landscapes and situations that wouldn't be possible before.

A game that mimics the battles seen in Braveheart or the like become more real since the extra power will allow for enemies to react with more "intelligence" and also be better able to give the viewer a greater suspension of disbelief (a term used for movies meaning that the viewer can become immersed into the fake world presented to them). We can now have hundreds greatly detailed characters with (save maybe the limits of the developers artistic assets) their own unique characteristics which just serves to be a more immersive experience.


We've seen Wii-like capabilities before with various peripherals for game-specific uses, the only difference now is that with the Wii it is standard, so you'll get more games that reflect this sort of functionality. Regardless, the Wii will be doing what has already been done before.

Thats not to say that I'm a hater by any means. I am a sucker for Mario and Mario Galaxy looks great. So hopefully nobody is offended.

 

[Kaotik]

I see Wii as more "next gen console" than either PS3 or XB360 - they're both basicly just more of the same old stuff made prettier, while Wii actually brings something really new to the table

 

[Sis]

Next generation implies something more in-tune with the way that games are going to evolve.

This is a good point. While I used a fairly strict dictionary form of the term 'next-gen' to mean "coming after and succeeding its predecessor," what you imply is that the vernacular of 'next-gen' is different than it's definition. So while the graphical leap for the PS3 and Xbox 360 both indicate a generational leap, the Wii is left with merely a small jump and an innovative controller.

It's a compelling argument that the Wii is more of a variant of last-gen, rather than a true next-gen system, though I'm still not sure I agree. The problem is that defining 'next-gen' in these terms feels very subjective...

 

[Shifty Geezer]

It's a compelling argument that the Wii is more of a variant of last-gen, rather than a true next-gen system, though I'm still not sure I agree. The problem is that defining 'next-gen' in these terms feels very subjective...

Welcome to the English language!

BTW - when people talk about dictionary definitions of 'next-gen', which dictionary are they referring to?

 

[Sis]

I see Wii as more "next gen console" than either PS3 or XB360 - they're both basicly just more of the same old stuff made prettier, while Wii actually brings something really new to the table

Innovation really isn't a characteristic of 'next'-gen'. You can have in-generation innovations just as easily as transitional-generation innovations.

 

[Sis]

Welcome to the English language!

BTW - when people talk about dictionary definitions of 'next-gen', which dictionary are they referring to?

:smile: By dictionary definition, I meant more of the strict term combining "next" and "generation" being the dictionary definition; as far as I can tell there is no definition for "next generation". The vernacular of a word may not jive with the dictionary version of the word, which was my point...

 

[Kaotik]

Innovation really isn't a characteristic of 'next'-gen'. You can have in-generation innovations just as easily as transitional-generation innovations.

And prettier graphics is? How much more prettier does it need to be to be 'next-gen'? We do know that Wii can do better graphics than previous generation of consoles, even while it won't reach the level of PS3 & XB360 or even close to them.

 

[Sis]

And prettier graphics is? How much more prettier does it need to be to be 'next-gen'? We do know that Wii can do better graphics than previous generation of consoles, even while it won't reach the level of PS3 & XB360 or even close to them.

Pretty graphics implies performance improvements, so yes, prettier graphics is one indicator of a next-gen console, in my opinion. Which is why I consider the Wii to be a next-gen console; it exceeds its predecessor in a quantifiable way.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

Regarding gfx, if I look wat a good pc could do in 2004 with games like fc and hl2, and now look at what ps3 can do in 2007 in europe, I dont think that is such a ''next gen'' differance as some like to call it either.

 

[Tahir2]

It is not Next-gen it is "now gen" (TM) as is PS3 and Xbox360.
The successor to Wii will be truly next gen!

 

[Acert93]

Wii is a next generation console with last generation components under the hood and is currently running distinctly last generation games.

I am inclined to change my mind once the Wiimote begins demonstrating its value other than being an alternative input for the similar results / EyeToy-esq party emphasis, but I would lean toward defining a console by the entire package, including the software. And right now the Wii screams, "GCN-esq hardware with GCN games with a different controller". Not much of a next gen product/experience at this point for my tastes especially at the price they currently are holding. $50 more gets you a console that makes the Wii look like 4 year old hardware with games designed for 4 year old hardware -- which it is and they are.

It is Nintendo's new console and it has a few unique advancements, but the overall hardware and software package is retro.

 

[oli2]

This question is very reminiscent of questions that will certainly remind you something : "Is the Xbox a console or a PC ?" or "Why is GC aiming at kids ?"

 

[ninzel]

Well if we are going to look at the entire package let's look at services as well. Clearly a step up from GC and close in many ways to it's competitors.
Internet browser(360 lacks), digital distribution service ,standard permanent storage(360 can boast that), avatar service,weather and news channel and an as yet to be rolled out online play service.
The only thing lacking in the Wii is relative power. In every other way it's actually quite a robust system.
Maybe we should defining a console by what it does for the consumer and not how it does it(power under the hood). Clearly the Wii does as much as for the consumer as it's competitors and does it in a smaller and more affordable package. Pretty advanced if you ask me.

 

[tongue_of_colicab]

That actually sounds pretty good too. Might want to add the price too as a less than 200 dollar to produce console cant be compared to one that costs over 800 dollars to produce on the spec front.

In the end it I guess it will always be hard to give one meaning to next gen as you will have those of fanboys, techheads and the ''normal'' people all having a different look on things. The fanboys will need a way to defend their console, the techhead will probably look more to the technicall aspect than what it actually does and the normal people just want something to play their games on and probably care little weater their console cpu has 100million or 1million transistors. To them a transistor is a transistor no matter if its from a 5 year old design or from a new highly complex design.

 

[Acert93]

Well if we are going to look at the entire package let's look at services as well. Clearly a step up from GC and close in many ways to it's competitors.
Internet browser(360 lacks), digital distribution service ,standard permanent storage(360 can boast that), avatar service,weather and news channel and an as yet to be rolled out online play service.
The only thing lacking in the Wii is relative power. In every other way it's actually quite a robust system.

Yet you could look at all the things it lacks compared to last gen consoles like online gameplay, DVD playback, and so forth as well as those features and services it is missing compared to next gen consoles (which is a huge list). And once you consider things like the browsing is going to eventually cost consumers it isn't so clear. If a browser alone is a defining trait of next gen then the 360 isn't and the Dreamcast is.

Whether you think Wii is or isn't really depends on what you, individually, are looking for. But you can break it up feature by feature and service by service and on the hardware and game spectrum it is clearly closer to the older consoles than the newer ones and almost all of its features and services have been done a long time ago.

If the Wii didn't have the Wiimote I don't think this would even be a question outside of, "It is Nintendo's newest so it is their next gen, just not next gen in the market". Which goes back to someone elses point: If Sony had repacked the PS2 with a couple EyeToys and promoted online out of the box for $249 would it make the PS2 next gen compared to the PS3 (or 360)? Looking at the very large standard HDD, much richer online environment, HD output and HD media, and huge leap in computational power I would scoff at the idea such a package is next gen compared to the real PS3.

I take my stance personally as a longtime Nintendo consumer and GCN owner. I have a GCN and Wavebird. Online is something Nintendo told me years ago to go do elsewhere and right now their offering is paltry anyhow (and gonna cost eventually). So I get a mild GCN update and a Wiimote. I could have essentially had that with "Wavebird II" if they chose to.

I personally don't consider Wavebird II (Wiimote) on hardware I pretty much already have and have had since 2002 to be next gen. Others are free to disagree but I don't feel like paying more for Wii hardware than I paid for my GCN ($149) when the only real significant meaningful difference in term of experience is the controller which from reviews is really hit or miss on the software at this time.

 

[Kaotik]

But isn't it a known fact that Wii is quite a lot more powerful than GC (I mean, higher clocks on similar or same architecture, tons of more transistors telling there is actually something more in the chips etc), which makes the PS2+eyetoy-comparison obsolete?